nashville
gas
satty
argued
october
decided
december
petitioner
employer
requires
pregnant
employee
take
leave
absence
leave
employee
receives
sick
pay
paid
nonoccupational
disabilities
pregnancy
also
loses
accumulated
job
seniority
retained
leaves
nonoccupational
disabilities
result
although
petitioner
attempt
provide
temporary
work
return
employed
permanent
position
currently
employed
employee
also
applies
position
respondent
employee
action
challenging
policies
district
held
violated
title
vii
civil
rights
act
appeals
affirmed
held
petitioner
policy
denying
employees
returning
pregnancy
leave
accumulated
seniority
acts
deprive
employment
opportunities
adversely
affect
status
employee
sex
violation
title
vii
pp
petitioner
seniority
policy
facially
neutral
male
female
employees
retain
accumulated
seniority
leave
nonoccupational
disabilities
pregnancy
whereas
seniority
divested
employee
takes
leave
reason
including
pregnancy
discriminatory
effect
causes
run
afoul
pp
petitioner
merely
refused
extend
women
benefit
men
receive
imposed
women
substantial
burden
men
need
suffer
title
vii
require
greater
economic
benefits
paid
one
sex
different
roles
allow
read
permit
employer
burden
female
employees
way
deprive
employment
opportunities
different
roles
general
electric
gilbert
distinguished
pp
proof
business
necessity
justifying
adoption
seniority
policy
respect
pregnancy
leave
case
petitioner
policy
awarding
pay
pregnant
employees
per
se
violation
title
vii
facial
neutrality
policy
end
analysis
shown
exclusion
pregnancy
compensation
conditions
mere
pretex
designed
effect
invidious
discrimination
members
one
sex
gilbert
supra
hence
absent
showing
decisions
based
finding
pretext
case
remanded
determine
whether
respondent
preserved
right
proceed
theory
pp
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
burger
stewart
white
blackmun
joined
part
brennan
marshall
powell
joined
powell
filed
opinion
concurring
result
concurring
part
brennan
marshall
joined
post
stevens
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
post
charles
wray
argued
cause
filed
briefs
petitioner
robert
weismueller
argued
cause
filed
brief
respondent
justice
rehnquist
delivered
opinion
petitioner
requires
pregnant
employees
take
formal
leave
absence
employee
receive
sick
pay
pregnancy
leave
also
loses
accumulated
job
seniority
result
petitioner
attempts
provide
employee
temporary
work
upon
return
employed
permanent
job
position
employee
presently
working
petitioner
also
applies
position
district
middle
district
tennessee
held
policies
violate
title
vii
civil
rights
act
stat
amended
et
seq
ed
supp
supp
appeals
sixth
circuit
affirmed
granted
certiorari
decide
light
opinion
last
term
general
electric
gilbert
whether
lower
courts
properly
applied
title
vii
petitioner
policies
respecting
pregnancy
two
separate
policies
issue
case
first
petitioner
practice
giving
sick
pay
employees
disabled
reason
nonoccupational
sickness
injury
disabled
pregnancy
second
petitioner
practice
denying
accumulated
seniority
female
employees
returning
work
following
disability
caused
childbirth
shall
discuss
reverse
order
petitioner
requires
employee
give
birth
take
pregnancy
leave
indeterminate
length
employee
accumulate
seniority
absent
instead
actually
loses
job
seniority
accrued
leave
commenced
petitioner
hold
employee
job
open
awaiting
return
pregnancy
leave
employee
wishes
return
work
leave
placed
open
position
qualified
individual
currently
employed
bidding
time
permanent
position
becomes
available
company
attempts
find
temporary
work
employee
employee
acquires
permanent
position
regains
previously
accumulated
seniority
purposes
pension
vacation
like
regain
purpose
bidding
future
job
openings
respondent
began
work
petitioner
march
clerk
customer
accounting
department
commenced
maternity
leave
december
gave
birth
child
january
seven
weeks
later
sought
petitioner
position
previously
held
eliminated
result
bona
fide
cutbacks
department
temporary
employment
found
lower
salary
earned
prior
taking
leave
holding
temporary
employment
respondent
unsuccessfully
applied
three
permanent
positions
petitioner
position
awarded
another
employee
begun
work
petitioner
respondent
returned
leave
respondent
credited
seniority
accumulated
prior
leave
awarded
positions
applied
temporary
assignment
completed
respondent
requested
due
lack
work
job
openings
petitioner
change
status
maternity
leave
termination
order
draw
unemployment
compensation
conclude
petitioner
policy
denying
accumulated
seniority
female
employees
returning
pregnancy
leave
violates
title
vii
supp
section
declares
unlawful
employment
practice
employer
limit
segregate
classify
employees
applicants
employment
way
deprive
tend
deprive
individual
employment
opportunities
otherwise
adversely
affect
status
employee
individual
sex
recognized
however
intentional
discrimination
policies
neutral
face
discriminatory
effect
may
run
afoul
griggs
duke
power
beyond
dispute
petitioner
policy
depriving
employees
returning
pregnancy
leave
accumulated
seniority
acts
deprive
employment
opportunities
adversely
affect
status
employee
apparent
previous
recitation
events
occurred
following
respondent
return
pregnancy
leave
petitioner
policy
denied
specific
employment
opportunities
otherwise
obtained
even
ultimately
able
regain
permanent
position
petitioner
felt
effects
lower
seniority
level
attendant
relegation
less
desirable
lower
paying
jobs
remainder
career
petitioner
gilbert
supra
showing
general
electric
policy
compensating
disabilities
except
pregnancy
favored
men
women
evidence
produced
suggest
men
received
benefits
general
electric
disability
insurance
fund
women
men
women
subject
generally
disabilities
covered
presumably
drew
similar
amounts
insurance
fund
therefore
upheld
plan
title
vii
proof
package
fact
worth
men
women
impossible
find
discriminatory
effect
scheme
simply
women
disabled
result
pregnancy
receive
benefits
say
discrimination
result
simply
employer
plan
less
appears
disabilities
constitute
additional
risk
unique
women
failure
compensate
risk
destroy
presumed
parity
benefits
accruing
men
women
alike
results
facially
evenhanded
inclusion
risks
omitted
recognition
petitioner
facially
neutral
seniority
system
deprive
women
employment
opportunities
sex
end
inquiry
title
vii
company
business
necessitates
adoption
particular
leave
policies
title
vii
prohibit
company
applying
policies
leaves
absence
including
pregnancy
leaves
title
vii
violated
even
though
policies
may
burden
female
employees
griggs
supra
dothard
rawlinson
agree
district
case
since
proof
business
necessity
adduced
respect
policies
question
entitled
assume
justification
exists
ii
basis
evidence
presented
district
petitioner
policy
awarding
pay
pregnant
employees
legally
indistinguishable
program
upheld
gilbert
gilbert
petitioner
compensates
employees
limited
periods
time
employee
must
miss
work
illness
disability
gilbert
compensation
extended
absences
emphasized
gilbert
exclusions
kind
per
se
violations
title
vii
exclusion
pregnancy
plan
providing
general
coverage
discrimination
plaintiff
presentation
evidence
demonstrate
exclusion
pregnancy
compensated
conditions
mere
pretex
designed
effect
invidious
discrimination
members
one
sex
title
vii
apply
ibid
gilbert
evidence
introduced
indicating
women
drew
substantially
greater
sums
men
general
electric
program
even
though
excluded
pregnancy
nn
holding
depend
evidence
district
gilbert
expressly
declined
find
present
actuarial
value
coverage
equal
men
women
upheld
disability
program
ground
neither
finding
evidence
support
finding
financial
benefits
plan
worked
discriminate
definable
group
class
terms
aggregate
risk
protection
derived
group
class
program
confronted
facially
neutral
plan
whose
fault
underinclusiveness
burden
plaintiff
show
plan
discriminates
basis
sex
violation
title
vii
albemarle
paper
moody
mcdonnell
douglas
green
need
decide
whether
confronted
facially
neutral
plan
necessary
prove
intent
establish
prima
facie
violation
cf
mcdonnell
douglas
supra
griggs
held
violation
established
proof
discriminatory
effect
difficult
perceive
exclusion
pregnancy
disability
insurance
plan
compensation
program
deprive
individual
employment
opportunities
otherwise
adversely
affect
status
employee
violation
direct
effect
exclusion
merely
loss
income
period
employee
work
exclusion
direct
effect
upon
either
employment
opportunities
job
status
plaintiff
attack
gilbert
supra
brought
appear
proper
section
title
vii
analyze
questions
disability
payments
respondent
failed
prove
even
discriminatory
effect
respect
petitioner
plan
candidly
concedes
brief
petitioner
sick
leave
benefit
plan
intents
purposes
weekly
sickness
accident
insurance
plan
examined
gilbert
exclusion
sick
pay
manner
respondent
treated
differently
petitioner
gilbert
control
brief
respondent
respondent
however
contends
petitioner
violated
title
vii
policy
respecting
seniority
following
return
pregnancy
leave
pay
differentiation
must
also
fall
conclusion
means
follows
premise
respondent
abandoned
attacks
aspects
petitioner
employment
policies
following
rulings
adverse
district
position
scarcely
consistent
present
one
course
recognized
geduldig
aiello
gilbert
facial
neutrality
employee
benefit
plan
end
analysis
shown
distinctions
involving
pregnancy
mere
pretexts
designed
effect
invidious
discrimination
members
one
sex
gilbert
petitioner
refusal
allow
pregnant
employees
retain
accumulated
seniority
may
deemed
relevant
trier
fact
deciding
whether
petitioner
plan
pretext
certainly
require
finding
trier
fact
say
nothing
making
finding
original
matter
district
sitting
trier
fact
made
finding
case
advised
whether
requested
decision
appeals
based
finding
instead
embodied
generally
line
reasoning
appeals
fourth
circuit
followed
opinion
gilbert
general
electric
since
rejected
line
reasoning
opinion
gilbert
judgment
appeals
respect
petitioner
policies
must
vacated
district
better
position
know
whether
respondent
adequately
preserved
courts
right
proceed
district
theory
described
affirmed
part
vacated
part
remanded
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
ruth
bader
ginsburg
marjorie
mazen
smith
joel
gora
judith
lichtman
american
civil
liberties
union
et
al
stephen
schlossberg
john
fillion
albert
woll
laurence
gold
american
federation
labor
congress
industrial
organizations
et
al
footnotes
appearance
neutrality
rests
part
petitioner
contention
pregnancy
leave
policy
identical
formal
leave
absence
granted
employees
male
female
order
may
pursue
additional
education
however
petitioner
policy
denying
accumulated
seniority
employees
returning
leaves
absence
date
applied
outside
pregnancy
context
since
two
employees
requested
formal
leaves
absence
pursue
college
degree
neither
employee
returned
work
petitioner
district
found
even
employees
returning
long
periods
absence
due
related
injuries
lose
seniority
fact
seniority
continues
accumulate
absent
supp
record
reveals
least
one
employee
absent
work
months
due
heart
attack
yet
returned
previous
job
end
period
full
seniority
dating
back
date
hire
conclusion
petitioner
job
seniority
policies
violate
title
vii
finds
support
regulations
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
eeoc
guidelines
eeoc
specify
ritten
unwritten
employment
policies
practices
involving
accrual
seniority
reinstatement
shall
applied
disability
due
pregnancy
childbirth
terms
conditions
applied
temporary
disabilities
cfr
gilbert
rejected
another
portion
guideline
conflicted
prior
thus
contemporaneous
interpretations
eeoc
interpretations
federal
agencies
charged
executing
legislation
dealing
sex
discrimination
applicable
legislative
history
title
vii
however
set
completely
naught
weight
given
guideline
cf
griggs
duke
power
portion
guideline
prohibits
practice
attack
fully
consistent
past
interpretations
title
vii
eeoc
see
eeoc
first
annual
report
doc
eeoc
first
annual
digest
legal
interpretations
july
opinion
letter
gc
june
cch
eeoc
decisions
cch
eeoc
decisions
pointed
conflicting
opinions
federal
agencies
responsible
regulating
field
sex
discrimination
portion
guideline
therefore
entitled
weight
one
considered
gilbert
skidmore
swift
indeed
petitioner
policy
denying
accumulated
seniority
employees
returning
pregnancy
leave
might
easily
conflict
economic
efficiency
interests
particular
result
petitioner
policy
inexperienced
employees
favored
experienced
employees
employees
spent
lengthy
periods
petitioner
might
expected
loyal
company
displaced
relatively
new
employees
female
employees
may
also
less
motivated
perform
efficiently
jobs
greater
difficulty
advancing
firm
brother
powell
concurring
opinion
suggests
also
remand
allow
respondent
develop
theory
articulated
us
petitioner
plan
monetarily
worth
men
women
suggests
expansive
remand
required
time
respondent
formulated
case
reason
make
showing
discrimination
required
gilbert
post
respondent
complaint
filed
district
july
pretrial
order
entered
setting
forth
plaintiff
theory
defendant
theory
august
district
memorandum
order
judgment
filed
november
november
respectively
first
appeals
cases
brother
powell
refers
wetzel
liberty
mutual
ins
decided
february
see
opinion
justice
brennan
dissenting
general
electric
gilbert
time
respondent
filed
complaint
time
district
rendered
decision
geduldig
aiello
recently
decided
said
respondent
behalf
question
whether
analysis
case
carried
cognate
sections
title
vii
open
one
opinion
gilbert
issues
course
speaks
think
rightly
characterized
drastic
change
law
understood
exist
enable
respondent
raise
reopen
issues
remand
settled
principles
otherwise
able
assume
appeals
district
apply
latter
principles
deciding
claims
may
open
respondent
remand
justice
powell
justice
brennan
justice
marshall
join
concurring
result
concurring
part
join
part
opinion
affirming
decision
appeals
petitioner
policy
denying
accumulated
seniority
purposes
female
employees
returning
pregnancy
leave
violates
title
vii
also
concur
result
part
ii
legal
status
title
vii
petitioner
policy
denying
accumulated
benefits
female
employees
pregnancy
leave
requires
factual
development
light
general
electric
gilbert
write
separately
however
appears
constricted
unnecessarily
scope
inquiry
remand
holding
prematurely
respondent
failed
meet
burden
establishing
prima
facie
case
petitioner
policy
discriminatory
title
vii
case
tried
district
reviewed
appeals
decision
gilbert
appellate
upheld
claim
accord
uniform
view
courts
appeals
disability
plan
treated
pregnancy
differently
disabilities
per
se
violative
title
vii
since
respondent
reason
make
showing
discrimination
required
gilbert
follow
usual
practice
vacating
judgment
remanding
permit
lower
reconsider
ruling
light
intervening
decision
issue
simply
one
burden
proof
properly
rests
title
vii
plaintiff
albemarle
paper
moody
mcdonnell
douglas
green
full
opportunity
presentation
relevant
facts
harris
nelson
given
meandering
course
title
vii
adjudication
taken
final
resolution
lawsuit
often
possible
parties
lower
courts
proceeded
ultimately
erroneous
theory
case
mistaken
theory
premised
understanding
law
record
constituted
foreclose
arguments
made
necessary
ruling
prefer
remand
controversy
permit
lower
courts
pass
new
contentions
light
whatever
additional
evidence
deemed
necessary
example
albemarle
paper
moody
supra
approved
appeals
conclusion
employer
proved
job
relatedness
testing
program
declined
permit
immediate
issuance
injunction
use
testing
plant
thought
remand
district
indicated
part
appropriate
standard
proof
job
relatedness
clarified
today
plaintiffs
today
specifically
apprised
opportunity
present
evidence
even
validated
tests
might
pretext
discrimination
light
alternative
selection
procedures
available
company
similarly
teamsters
found
remand
factual
development
appropriate
government
employed
erroneous
evidentiary
approach
precluded
satisfaction
burden
identifying
nonapplicant
employees
victims
employer
unlawful
discrimination
thus
entitled
retroactive
seniority
award
may
true
many
nonapplicant
employees
desired
applied
jobs
knowledge
company
policy
discrimination
government
must
carry
burden
proof
respect
specific
individual
remedial
hearings
conducted
district
remand
cf
brown
illinois
powell
concurring
part
respondent
abandoned
theory
enabled
prevail
district
appeals
instead
urges
case
distinguishable
gilbert
respondent
submits
exclusion
sick
pay
one
many
ways
female
employees
experience
pregnancy
treated
differently
petitioner
holding
gilbert
controlling
upon
examination
overall
manner
female
employees
experience
pregnancy
treated
petitioner
becomes
plain
petitioner
policies
much
pervasive
mere
sickness
accident
insurance
plan
gilbert
brief
respondent
although
respondent
theory
fully
articulated
presents
plausible
contention
one
required
raised
gilbert
foreclosed
stipulated
evidence
record
see
gilbert
concurrent
findings
lower
courts
see
arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
dev
inconceivable
remand
respondent
able
show
combined
operation
petitioner
mandatory
policy
denial
accumulated
benefits
yielded
significantly
less
net
compensation
petitioner
female
employees
class
male
employees
number
former
latter
endured
forced
absence
work
without
sick
pay
compensation
parties
stipulated
july
august
petitioner
placed
employees
pregnancy
leave
employees
leave
periods
two
months
app
possible
women
exhausted
benefits
time
compelled
take
maternity
leave
denial
sick
pay
period
absence
resulted
relative
loss
net
compensation
petitioner
female
work
force
petitioner
male
employees
hand
subject
mandatory
leave
policy
eligible
receive
compensation
form
period
absence
work
due
sickness
disability
short
foreclose
possibility
facts
developed
remand
support
finding
package
fact
worth
men
women
gilbert
supra
finding
made
view
respondent
case
barred
gilbert
case
related
district
noted
evidence
introduced
trial
good
deal
stipulated
concerning
relative
cost
general
electric
providing
benefits
plan
male
female
employees
indicated
disabilities
excluded
cost
plan
general
electric
per
female
employee
least
high
substantially
higher
cost
per
male
employee
footnotes
omitted
district
also
found
inclusion
disabilities
within
scope
plan
increase
plan
costs
amount
though
large
time
undeterminable
district
declined
make
explicit
finding
actuarial
value
coverage
equal
men
women
may
referring
simply
quantum
specificity
proof
necessary
establish
business
necessity
defense
see
gilbert
general
electric
supp
ed
event
gilbert
viewed
evidence
record
precluding
prima
facie
showing
discrimination
compensation
contrary
whatever
ultimate
probative
value
evidence
introduced
district
subject
least
tended
illustrate
selection
risks
covered
plan
operate
fact
discriminate
women
record
developed
gilbert
basis
remand
view
record
case
precluding
finding
discrimination
compensation
within
principles
enunciated
gilbert
simply
remand
issue
proceedings
light
decision
case
add
however
petitioner
seniority
policy
face
appea
neutral
treatment
male
female
employees
ante
district
noted
pregnant
women
required
take
leave
thereby
lose
job
bidding
seniority
leave
required
related
disabilities
supp
md
mandatory
maternity
leave
identical
formal
leave
absence
granted
employees
male
female
order
may
pursue
additional
education
ante
see
cases
cited
general
electric
gilbert
brennan
dissenting
gilbert
held
rationale
articulated
geduldig
aiello
involving
challenge
equal
protection
grounds
also
applied
title
vii
claim
respect
treatment
pregnancy
benefit
plans
see
since
geduldig
silent
title
vii
issue
courts
appeals
unreasonably
failed
anticipate
extent
geduldig
rationale
deemed
applicable
statutory
context
see
washington
davis
also
declined
evaluate
abstract
claims
concerning
equitable
balance
struck
statutory
rights
victims
contractual
rights
nonvictim
employees
preferring
lodge
task
first
instance
trial
best
able
deal
problem
light
facts
developed
hearings
remand
majority
places
reliance
respondent
failure
appeal
part
district
ruling
found
petitioner
mandatory
leave
policy
lawful
title
vii
ante
reasons
stated
text
however
petitioner
maintenance
mandatory
policy
even
entirely
lawful
may
bearing
question
whether
policy
fact
worth
men
women
gilbert
also
theory
left
open
remand
demonstrated
gilbert
present
bar
opinion
one
point
appears
read
gilbert
holding
title
vii
plaintiff
case
must
demonstrate
exclusion
pregnancy
compensated
conditions
mere
pretex
ante
later
opinion
need
decide
whether
confronted
facially
neutral
plan
necessary
prove
intent
establish
prima
facie
violation
ibid
noted
supra
assume
petitioner
seniority
policy
case
facially
neutral
moreover
although
may
ambiguity
language
gilbert
see
concurring
opinions
justice
stewart
justice
blackmun
viewed
decision
case
grounded
primarily
emphasized
fact
discrimination
compensation
required
shown
indeed
fair
reading
evidence
gilbert
demonstrated
total
compensation
women
terms
plans
well
may
exceeded
men
suggest
mathematical
exactitude
need
shown
every
case
essential
equality
compensation
comparable
work
heart
view
proof
discrimination
respect
establish
prima
facie
violation
justice
stevens
concurring
judgment
petitioner
enforces
two
policies
treat
pregnant
employees
less
favorably
employees
incur
temporary
disability
first
denied
seniority
benefits
absence
work
thereafter
second
denied
sick
pay
absence
holds
former
policy
unlawful
whereas
latter
lawful
concur
judgment
believe
explanation
legal
distinction
two
policies
may
engender
confusion
among
must
make
compliance
decisions
basis
advance
separate
rather
pragmatic
basis
reconciling
two
parts
decision
general
electric
gilbert
general
problem
decide
company
policy
attaches
special
burden
risk
absenteeism
caused
pregnancy
prima
facie
violation
statutory
prohibition
sex
discrimination
answer
always
thought
quite
plainly
correct
foreclosed
holding
gilbert
answer
never
seem
dictated
view
discrimination
pregnancy
discrimination
however
made
clear
correct
answer
sometimes
even
though
plan
frankly
unambiguously
discriminates
pregnancy
facially
neutral
find
unlawful
discriminatory
effect
question
identify
discriminatory
effect
two
possible
answers
suggested
seems
rely
difference
benefit
burden
difference
judgment
differences
illusory
agree
effect
respondent
seniority
plan
significantly
different
general
electric
disability
plan
gilbert
suggest
difference
may
described
way
although
gilbert
unwilling
hold
discrimination
pregnancy
compared
physical
disabilities
discrimination
account
sex
may
nevertheless
true
discrimination
pregnant
formerly
pregnant
employees
compared
employees
constitute
sex
discrimination
distinction
may
pragmatically
expressed
terms
whether
employer
policy
adversely
affects
woman
beyond
term
pregnancy
leave
although
opinion
gilbert
characterizes
facially
neutral
company
policy
differentiates
absence
caused
pregnancy
absence
caused
illness
factual
context
gilbert
limits
reach
broad
characterization
reasoning
disability
plan
gilbert
discriminate
pregnant
employees
formerly
pregnant
employees
working
company
employee
whether
pregnant
nonpregnant
contracted
measles
receive
disability
benefits
moreover
employee
returning
maternity
leave
also
receive
benefits
hand
pregnancy
illness
occurring
absent
maternity
leave
covered
period
maternity
leave
pregnant
woman
temporarily
cut
benefits
extended
company
plan
times
woman
treated
employees
terms
eligibility
plan
benefits
company
seniority
plan
case
markedly
different
effect
attempting
return
work
formerly
pregnant
woman
deprived
previously
accumulated
seniority
policy
affects
ability
work
force
compensation
return
company
argues
effects
permissible
flow
initial
decision
treat
pregnancy
unexcused
absence
argument
misconceives
scope
protection
afforded
gilbert
initial
decisions
general
electric
plan
attach
consequences
condition
pregnancy
extended
beyond
period
maternity
leave
gilbert
allowed
employer
treat
pregnancy
leave
temporal
gap
full
employment
status
woman
period
employer
may
treat
employee
manner
consistent
determination
pregnancy
illness
case
however
company
seniority
policy
adverse
impact
employee
status
pregnancy
leave
terminated
formerly
pregnant
person
permanently
disadvantaged
compared
rest
work
force
since
persons
adversely
affected
policy
constitute
exclusively
female
class
company
plan
obvious
discriminatory
effect
analysis
clear
petitioner
seniority
rule
discriminating
formerly
pregnant
employees
invalid
equally
clear
denial
sick
pay
maternity
leave
consistent
gilbert
rationale
since
company
free
withhold
benefits
period
evident
dissent
gilbert
prefer
decide
case
simpler
rationale
since
preference
foreclosed
gilbert
concur
judgment
understanding
law
stands
although
discrimination
pregnancy
compared
physical
disabilities
permissible
discrimination
pregnant
formerly
pregnant
employees
analysis
effect
company
rules
relating
absenteeism
appropriate
rules
referred
neutral
criteria
whether
absence
voluntary
involuntary
perhaps
particularly
costly
case
however
involve
rules
kind
rather
rule
issue
places
risk
absence
caused
pregnancy
class
definition
rule
discriminates
account
sex
capacity
become
pregnant
primarily
differentiates
female
male
analysis
whether
rule
relates
hiring
promotion
acceptability
excuse
absence
exclusion
disability
insurance
plan
general
electric
gilbert
stevens
dissenting
gilbert
supra
held
exclusion
pregnancy
plan
providing
general
coverage
discrimination
consistently
holding
today
decision
treat
pregnancy
disease
disability
purposes
seniority
retention
face
discriminatory
policy
ante
ante
stewart
concurring
ibid
blackmun
concurring
part
differences
benefits
burdens
provide
meaningful
test
discrimination
since
hypothesis
favored
class
always
benefited
disfavored
class
equally
burdened
grant
seniority
benefit
shared
burdened
class
conversely
denial
sick
pay
burden
benefited
class
need
bear
second
apparent
ground
distinction
equally
unsatisfactory
suggests
analysis
seniority
plan
different
plan
attacked
title
vii
must
confess
understand
relevance
distinction
true
refers
discrimination
recognizes
significant
since
violation
occurs
facially
neutral
policy
discriminatory
effect
ante
emphasis
added
also
suggests
may
contain
requirement
intent
present
whatever
merits
suggestion
apparent
form
basis
differentiation
two
subparagraphs
case
since
expressly
refuses
decide
issue
ante
see
gilbert
although
greatest
difficulty
holding
gilbert
permissible
refuse
coverage
illness
contracted
maternity
leave
suppose
aspect
gilbert
may
explained
notion
illness
occurring
time
treated
though
attributable
pregnancy
therefore
embraced
within
area
permissible
discrimination
pregnancy
ante
two
limitations
effect
employer
policy
limited
period
pregnancy
leave
consistent
determination
pregnancy
illness
serve
focus
disparate
effect
policy
pregnancy
rather
pregnant
formerly
pregnant
employees
obviously
policies
attach
burden
pregnancy
also
burden
pregnant
formerly
pregnant
persons
consequence
allowed
gilbert
extent
focus
policy
indicated
physical
condition
rather
person
analysis
consistent
approach
taken
lower
courts
claims
discrimination
recognized
gilbert
nothing
foreclosing
employment
opportunity
cook
arentzen
epd
maclennan
american
airlines
supp
addressing
question
ever
employer
require
employee
take
pregnancy
leave
case
pose
issue
employer
may
require
employee
take
pregnancy
leave
ante
concurring
opinion
justice
powell
seems
suggest
even
employer
disparate
treatment
pregnant
employee
limited
period
pregnancy
leave
may
still
violate
title
vii
company
rule
greater
impact
one
sex
another
ante
analysis
require
overruling
gilbert
must
applied
great
caution
since
laws
probability
invalidate
inordinate
number
rules
theory
clear
showing
beyond
mathematical
exactitude
see
ante
necessary
hold
classification
definition
gender
specific
discriminates
basis
sex
usually
statistical
disparities
aid
determining
whether
apparently
neutral
classification
effect
gender
race
specific
course
statistics
unnecessary
prove
point
events
agree
issue
presented
us
case
accordingly
concur
determination
proper
scope
remand