Clauss C A, Berzon M, Bertin J
University of Wisconsin Law School, Madison 53706.
Environ Health Perspect. 1993 Jul;101 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):205-20. doi: 10.1289/ehp.93101s2205.
In a major decision handed down last term (International Union [UAW] versus Johnson Controls, Inc.), the Supreme Court ruled that employment practices excluding fertile or pregnant women from the workplace because of alleged concerns for fetal health constitute illegal sex discrimination. We analyze the three opinions in the case and explain why the decision was an essential first step to promoting reproductive and developmental health in the workplace. Continued progress toward eliminating or reducing reproductive occupational risks will require comprehensive legal strategies involving private lawsuits, governmental regulation and enforcement actions, and new legislation designed to preserve the existing rights of workers and to obtain new and additional protections. Finally, we caution that, in designing such strategies, it will be important to avoid solutions that either shift responsibility for reproductive health to workers, rather than to employers, or that undermine other important legal rights.
在上个任期做出的一项重大裁决（国际汽车、航空航天和农业机械工人国际联合会[UAW]诉江森自控有限公司）中，最高法院裁定，因所谓的胎儿健康担忧而将育龄或怀孕女性排除在工作场所之外的雇佣做法构成非法性别歧视。我们分析了该案件的三种意见，并解释了为何该裁决是促进工作场所生殖与发育健康的关键第一步。要在消除或降低生殖职业风险方面持续取得进展，将需要综合法律策略，包括私人诉讼、政府监管与执法行动，以及旨在维护工人现有权利并获得新的额外保护的新立法。最后，我们提醒，在设计此类策略时，重要的是要避免那些要么将生殖健康责任转嫁给工人而非雇主，要么破坏其他重要法律权利的解决方案。
