The Oklahoma Bar Journal August 2025

regarding standing, changing dress codes to permit maternity clothes, transferring to remote work, leave for related medical appointments, additional time for restroom or snack breaks, allowing employees to carry and drink water in their work area and alter nating between sitting and standing . 36 The obligation to provide “rea sonable accommodation” is subject to the “undue hardship” akin to that used under the ADA. Thus, the employer is not obligated to provide a reasonable accommo dation that is significantly diffi cult or expensive considering the employer’s financial resources and manpower. The PWFA incorpo rates the ADA’s interactive process requirements and instructs that it will be used to determine appro priate reasonable accommodation. The interactive process can occur via telephone, email or in person, as long as the employer responds promptly and in good faith. ers from requiring employees to accept accommodations other than any reasonable accommodation arrived at through the interactive process. 37 This is meant to cod ify the prohibition from Johnson Controls and address the con cern that employers may restrict what pregnant workers do in the mistaken belief that workers need accommodations they themselves did not request. Prohibited Practice No. 3: Denial of Employment Opportunities This prohibited practice covers claims traditionally classified as discriminatory, such as “failure to hire” or “failure to promote.” An employee’s or applicant’s known Prohibited Practice No. 2: Forced Accommodation The PWFA prohibits employ

Regardless of the legal battles surrounding the PWFA, it remains imperative for employees to communicate with their employers about the needs that arise from pregnancy and the birth of a child and how employer policies may create challenges (many of which can be unintended).

accommodation. The PWFA also includes anti-retaliation and anti-coercion provisions for employees, former employees or applicants who exercise their rights under the PWFA. The PWFA also includes such pro tections for employees, former employees and applicants who try to assist others in exercising their rights under the PWFA. The anti-retaliation provision protects workers from an employer’s conduct that is materially adverse or might dissuade a reasonable worker from making or supporting a charge of discrimination. The anti-coercion provision is modeled after the ADA’s interference section. These are broader than retaliation claims and include intimidating an applicant from requesting accom modation during the hiring process (because it will not result in being hired) or where the employer issues a policy or requirement that limits the employee’s right to request a reasonable accommodation of a known limitation.

need for reasonable accommoda tion cannot serve as part of the covered entity’s decision regard ing hiring or promotion unless the reasonable accommodation imposes an undue hardship on the covered entity. Prohibited Practice No. 4: Forced Leave This prohibition prevents employers from requiring an employee to take paid or unpaid leave if another reasonable accom modation can be provided. This in no way prohibits leave from serving as a reasonable accommo dation if the employee requests it or if no other accommodation allows the employee to remain at work absent undue hardship. Prohibited Practice No. 5: Taking Adverse Action This prohibition provides that an employer cannot take adverse action in terms, condi tions or privileges of employment against a qualified employee or applicant for using a reasonable

Statements or opinions expressed in the Oklahoma Bar Journal are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Oklahoma Bar Association, its officers, Board of Governors, Board of Editors or staff.

30 | AUGUST 2025

THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL