Press Releases

Customs & Border Protection Employees Reach $45 Million Settlement After Uncovering Widespread Pregnancy Discrimination

Cohen Milstein

August 13, 2024

The settlement includes a number of major reforms to the agency after members of a class of over 1,000 employees challenged a widespread practice of involuntary removal from active duty because of pregnancy, resulting in lost wages and causing them emotional harm.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – A class of over 1,000 employees of Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the largest federal law enforcement agency in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, has reached a historic $45 million settlement in a class action alleging that the agency discriminated against pregnant employees. The settlement includes an agreement by CBP to enact sweeping reforms to policies that will eliminate long-standing discriminatory practices.

Initially filed in 2016 with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the case challenged the widespread practice of placing Officers and Agriculture Specialists on light duty because of their pregnancy without offering them the opportunity to remain in their regular positions, with or without an accommodation, in violation of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. 

Placement on temporary light duty limited the pregnant employees’ ability to earn overtime and enhanced pay rates for service at night and on Sundays. In addition, pregnant officers placed on leave were required to immediately turn in their firearms after reporting their pregnancy and often required to requalify to carry their firearm.

“Announcing my pregnancy to my colleagues and supervisor should have been a happy occasion – but it quickly became clear that such news was not welcome. The assumption was that I could no longer effectively do my job, just because I was pregnant. It was traumatizing, frustrating and demoralizing,” said Roberta Gabaldon, lead plaintiff in the case. “My managers don’t get to start making decisions for me just because I’m pregnant. This policy was never about our abilities – it was about the agency’s outdated views on pregnancy.”

Affected employees alleged that this systematic practice violated federal law because the agency treated pregnancy differently from all other short-term disabilities. Typically, CBP employees who experience injuries unrelated to their work or illness were given the option to request light duty, while pregnant officers and agricultural specialists were directed to placement on temporary light duty.

“In one of the premier law enforcement agencies in our country, it is very troubling that pregnant officers and specialists were disadvantaged solely because of their pregnancy,” said Joseph Sellers, partner at Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll and co-chair of the Civil Rights & Employment practice. “Fortunately, this settlement will provide significant relief to victims of this unlawful practice and, with the CBP’s adoption of reforms negotiated in this settlement, CBP should become a leader among law enforcement agencies in providing equal opportunities for pregnant employees to thrive and be regarded as equally capable of performing their jobs as their non-pregnant colleagues.”

In addition to paying monetary relief to redress financial losses and emotional harm of the class members, CBP agreed to reform its personnel practices to ensure pregnant officers and specialists are treated equally in their ability or inability to work as their colleagues.  Those reforms include enacting a new policy that presumes pregnant officers and agriculture specialists can continue to serve in their positions, identifies a non-exhaustive list of accommodations for pregnant employees and mandatory training for managers and supervisors on the rights and reasonable accommodations for pregnant workers. Any pregnant employees currently on light duty due to CBP’s current practice will be able to return to full duty and their normal shift schedule.

“CBP has a well-documented history of forcibly sidelining their employees when they report their pregnancies. This policy created tremendous emotional and economic harm for these women, and we are pleased to have secured justice and accountability for their mistreatment,” said Shannon Leary, partner at Gilbert Employment Law and chair of its LGBTQ+ and Gender Issues practice. “This settlement is about more than rectifying a discriminatory practice – it’s about making the entire agency a fair workplace for everyone.”

The EEOC certified the class action in April 2023. The settlement is expected to receive final approval in September. The class is represented by Joseph M. Sellers, Phoebe Wolfe, Harini Srinivasan and Megan Reif of Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll and Gary Gilbert, Shannon Leary, Cori Cohen and Rachel Petro of Gilbert Employment Law.

###

About Gilbert Employment Law, P.C.

Gilbert Employment Law, P.C., is the worker’s voice in litigation involving employee rights violations. Gilbert’s attorneys are highly skilled in representing federal employees before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and other federal administrative agencies. Gilbert Employment Law, P.C., has also represented employees in county and state courts, as well as U.S. District and Appeals Courts.

About Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC

Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC, a premier U.S. plaintiffs’ law firm, with over 100 attorneys across eight offices, champions the causes of real people—workers, consumers, small business owners, investors, and whistleblowers—working to deliver corporate reforms and fair markets for the common good. It has litigated landmark civil rights and employment disputes before the highest courts in the nation and continues to actively shape civil rights and employment law in the United States.