Dental Clinic Ordered to Pay $97K for Pregnancy Discrimination

USA: A Minnesota dental clinic, PL Dental in Coon Rapids, has been directed to pay nearly $100K to a pregnant woman, Christina Vescio-Holland, who was terminated from her position for being perceived as ‘very hormonal.’ The firing prompted a discrimination investigation by the Minnesota Department of Human Rights (MDHR), revealing the unlawful nature of the dismissal.

Pregnancy Discrimination Violates State Law

Upon informing her employer of the need to start parental leave in late December 2020, Vescio-Holland faced discrimination as the office manager cited her hormonal state as the reason for termination. Human Rights Commissioner Rebecca Lucero emphasised that state law has long prohibited pregnancy discrimination, highlighting the necessity for employers to have supportive policies for pregnant employees.

Compensation Awarded in Landmark Dental Malpractice Case

PL Dental is now obligated to pay $97,000 to Vescio-Holland, an amount equivalent to approximately three annual wages for the mother. Alongside the monetary settlement, the dental clinic must submit regular reports to state authorities to ensure compliance with anti-discrimination policies.

Victim Advocates for Persistence

In response to the resolution, Vescio-Holland encourages individuals facing similar situations not to lose hope and to explore available options. Her statement emphasises the importance of persistence and fighting against unjust treatment.

The MDHR asserts that pregnancy discrimination encompasses various actions, such as denying reasonable accommodations or firing employees based on pregnancy. The case brings attention to the broader issue of discrimination against pregnant individuals in the workplace.

Dentist Ordered to Pay Compensation After Patient’s Paralysis

National Trend in Pregnancy Discrimination

This incident is not isolated, as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reported over 2,200 cases of pregnancy discrimination last year. The news follows a recent case in New York City, where a pregnant PR executive alleges she was fired due to pregnancy-related bias, including comments about ‘pregnancy brain.’

While Vescio-Holland’s case concludes with a significant settlement, other instances of pregnancy discrimination persist. PL Dental attempted to blame the termination on performance problems, but the MDHR found no evidence to support this claim. The dental clinic is now required to address its compliance with anti-discrimination policies, emphasising the broader importance of combating workplace discrimination based on pregnancy.