ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Saturday, June 15, 1996 TAG: 9606170081
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-3 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: LAURENCE HAMMACK STAFF WRITER
The Virginia Supreme Court has agreed to review a Roanoke judge's decision that a woman who says she was fired because she was pregnant has no case against her employer.
The high court's decision, which lawyers said could come by the end of the year, could end confusion about Virginia's sexual discrimination laws in cases involving pregnant women.
Earlier this year, Attorney General Jim Gilmore urged the Supreme Court to hear Lisa Bailey's appeal, saying in court papers that guidance is needed on questions "that will continue to arise in the trial courts of Virginia."
Bailey, who worked as a sales coordinator for Scott-Gallaher Inc., filed a lawsuit in Roanoke Circuit Court, claiming that she was fired in 1994 after becoming pregnant and missing work on the advice of her doctor.
The lawsuit claimed the president of the Cloverdale company, which rents construction equipment, told Bailey that "her place was at home with the child, that babies get sick sometimes and Bailey would have to miss work to care for the child."
Last December, Circuit Judge Clifford Weckstein dismissed Bailey's lawsuit, ruling essentially that Virginia's sexual discrimination laws do not apply to someone who's pregnant.
The state Human Rights Act bars employers from firing workers on the grounds of sex, race, religion and national origin. However, Weckstein ruled that state law does not specifically define sexual discrimination as applying to issues of pregnancy or childbirth.
The judge noted a 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision that female employees of General Electric Co. in Salem could not sue for discrimination over a company policy that excluded pregnancy and childbirth costs from its benefits package.
Although the merits of Bailey's lawsuit have not been decided, the motion to dismiss that Weckstein granted treated the allegations as if they were true.
Most sex discrimination cases are handled in federal court. Because of the lack of state precedent, the pregnancy issue has created confusion in state courts across Virginia. About the same time Weckstein dismissed Bailey's suit, a judge in Newport News ruled the opposite way in a nearly identical case.
Terry Grimes, a Roanoke lawyer who represents Bailey, said the case likely will be argued before the Supreme Court in late summer, with a decision expected by the end of the year.
LENGTH: Medium: 51 linesby CNB