211 F. Supp. 3d 408
D.R.I.2016Background
- Plaintiff Allison Mayer, a nursing mother, was hired as an EMT by Professional Ambulance, LLC and worked two night shifts in February 2015. She requested reasonable break time and a private place to express breast milk.
- At hiring, manager Brenda Baginski initially offered only a bathroom; after discussion with Joseph Baginski, Plaintiff was told she could use Joseph’s office (with an interior window and flimsy covering).
- During shifts Plaintiff found the provided locations inadequate (lack of privacy, cold locked conference room) and heard male coworkers make derogatory comments while she attempted to pump.
- Plaintiff alleges that after requesting accommodations she was denied a schedule and training, then terminated within days; she claims replacement by a less-qualified male and resulting medical and emotional harm.
- Plaintiff sued under multiple statutes: FLSA §207(r) (lactation breaks), FLSA §215(a)(3) (retaliation), ADA, Title VII, Rhode Island Civil Rights Act (RICRA), and Rhode Island FEPA; Defendants moved to dismiss.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §207(r) of FLSA provides a private remedy beyond unpaid minimum wages for denial of lactation breaks | Mayer argues lost wages from termination are "unpaid minimum wages" and thus recoverable under §207(r) | Defendants rely on precedent and DOL guidance that §207(r) only remedies unpaid minimum wages during employment | Dismissed: Court holds §207(r) remedy is limited to unpaid minimum/overtime wages and not future wages lost by termination |
| Retaliation under FLSA §215(a)(3) — whether Mayer engaged in protected activity and pleaded causation | Mayer says she made oral complaints (rejected bathroom, complained to dispatcher) sufficient to put employer on notice; timing and changed tone show causation | Defendants argue complaints were not clear assertions of statutory rights and provided adequate locations | Survives: Court finds complaints plausibly sufficiently clear and causal link plausible at pleading stage |
| Whether individual defendants are "employers" under the FLSA | Mayer alleges individuals had ownership and day-to-day control (pleaded on information and belief) | Defendants argue allegations are conclusory and insufficient under Iqbal/Twombly | Survives: Court finds allegations distinguishable from cases of absent/low-involvement owners and denies dismissal of individuals |
| Whether lactation is protected under Title VII/RICRA and supports discrimination/hostile-work-environment claims | Mayer contends lactation is a pregnancy-related condition and Title VII/PDA cover unfavorable treatment/termination | Defendants argue many courts treat lactation as childcare choice and not a pregnancy-related condition | Survives: Court follows EEOC guidance and Fifth Circuit and finds lactation is pregnancy-related; discrimination and hostile-environment claims plausibly pleaded |
| Disability discrimination under ADA, RICRA, FEPA — is lactation a disability? | Mayer alleges lactation dysfunction and impaired ability to maintain supply | Defendants say normal lactation/pregnancy are not disabilities absent complications and claim lactation dysfunction not pleaded | Dismissed: Court finds plaintiff failed to plausibly plead a disability under ADA/analogous state laws |
| FEPA failure-to-accommodate (state law) — were offered spaces reasonable? | Mayer alleges provided spaces (office with window covering; unheated locked conference room) were not reasonable | Defendants assert they provided two locations and thus accommodated | Survives: Court holds reasonableness of accommodations is a factual question not resolved on motion to dismiss |
Key Cases Cited
- Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp., 563 U.S. 1 (2011) (oral complaints can constitute "filed any complaint" under FLSA retaliation provision)
- Valerio v. Putnam Assocs., Inc., 173 F.3d 35 (1st Cir. 1999) (internal complaints can be protected activity; courts should avoid construing statutes to incentivize immediate employer retaliation)
- EEOC v. Houston Funding II, Ltd., 717 F.3d 425 (5th Cir. 2013) (holding lactation is a condition related to pregnancy and discrimination against lactating employees can violate Title VII/PDA)
- Smith v. Stratus Computer, Inc., 40 F.3d 11 (1st Cir. 1994) (elements for prima facie discriminatory discharge under Title VII)
- Ruiz Rivera v. Pfizer Pharms., LLC, 521 F.3d 76 (1st Cir. 2008) (prima facie elements for disability discrimination under ADA)
- Gorski v. New Hampshire Dep’t of Corr., 290 F.3d 466 (1st Cir. 2002) (standard for hostile work environment: severe or pervasive harassment inquiry)
- Calero-Cerezo v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 355 F.3d 6 (1st Cir. 2004) (temporal proximity can establish causation at prima facie stage)
- Manning v. Boston Med. Ctr. Corp., 725 F.3d 34 (1st Cir. 2013) (role of senior non-owner employees in employer status analysis)