## Facts

- Donnicia Venters worked for Houston Funding as an account representative/collector from 2006 until her termination in February 2009.
- In December 2008, Venters took leave to give birth; the employer lacked a formal maternity-leave policy and no fixed return date was set.
- Venters stayed in contact with her supervisor and managers while on leave, including phone calls reflected in her records.
- Venters asked whether she could use a breast pump at work; her supervisor relayed the request to a company decisionmaker, who responded “NO” and suggested she “stay home longer.”
- After Venters reported she had been medically cleared to return and again asked to use a back room to pump, the decisionmaker told her her position had been filled.
- The employer sent a termination letter stating Venters was discharged for “job abandonment,” asserting she had not contacted her supervisor and had not attempted to return.
- The EEOC filed suit under Title VII, as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA), alleging Venters was terminated because she was lactating and sought to express breast milk at work.

## Issues

1. Whether discharging a female employee because she is lactating or expressing breast milk constitutes sex discrimination under Title VII as amended by the PDA.
2. Whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment on the legal ground that lactation or breast-pumping discrimination is not actionable sex discrimination.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit vacated the summary judgment for the employer and remanded.
- The court held that firing an employee because she is lactating or expressing breast milk is sex discrimination under Title VII as amended by the PDA.
- The court rejected a categorical rule that lactation-based adverse action cannot be sex discrimination.
- The court noted record evidence that could support a finding the stated “job abandonment” reason was inconsistent with Venters’s documented contacts and the timing of the breast-pumping request.

## Legal Principles

- Title VII’s ban on discrimination “because of sex,” as amended by the PDA, includes discrimination based on “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.”
- Lactation is a physiological result of pregnancy and childbirth and qualifies as a “related medical condition” under the PDA.
- An adverse action based on lactation or the need to express breast milk imposes a burden that male employees cannot suffer and is therefore sex-linked discrimination.
- Summary judgment is improper when based on an erroneous legal premise that the challenged conduct is categorically outside Title VII/PDA coverage.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit held that lactation and expressing breast milk are pregnancy-related medical conditions protected by the PDA, making termination for lactation or pumping a cognizable Title VII sex-discrimination claim, and it vacated and remanded for further proceedings.


Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm’n v. Houston Funding II, Ltd., 717 F.3d 425 (5th Cir. 2013)