Mothers work inc case study

Case Studies: Using concepts from the chapter readings students will provide their own in depth analysis of each assigned case and answer all questions at the end of each case study. Each analysis should include an in-text citation and end of paper reference (from the chapter with a page number) that relates to the case study. In addition, an Assignment Cover Sheet is required with each analysis (see Appendix).

Case studies are listed in the course syllabus

Case 1: Gender: Mother’s Work pg 109-113 – Answer questions 1-6 pg 112.

Text book name is Canas, K. A. & Sondak, H. Opportunities and Challenges of Workplace Diversity (3rd Edition). Pearson.

Please answer the six discussion questions below. Please number your answers individually. APA 2 page is required.

Case Study: Mothers Work Inc: Brand Image and Accusations of Employment Discrimination

On June 27, 2003, Rebecca Matthias, the COO of the world’s largest maternity clothing company, Mothers Work, Inc., called an urgent meeting with her top executives: Dan Matthias, Mothers Work’s chairman, Sheryl Roth Rogers, vice president of marketing, Mona Astra Liss, Mothers Work’s publicity director, and Frank Mullay, vice president of stores. The five administrative personnel were gathered to discuss how the company would address a recent lawsuit filed against Mothers Work, Inc. by a former district manager, Cynthia Papageorge. Papageorge had accused Mr. Mullay of firing her three years earlier because of her gender and pregnancy.

Mothers Work, Inc. had already settled two similar discriminatory complaints (one of which was filed by Papageorge’s boss, Jane Dowe). Papageorge’s case, however, had been embraced by the media and damage to Mothers Work’s reputation could have ensued. Women’s rights groups issued statements of disapproval within days of the lawsuit’s filing. For example, Serrin Foster, the president of Feminists for Life, declared, “It is mind blowing to think that a company named Mothers Work that profits from selling apparel to pregnant women would terminate [women’s employment] simply because of their maternity.” 46 ,47, 48

Rebecca Matthias is renowned for her support of women in the workplace, as her company was founded on the premise that women can be both professionals and mothers. The Mothers Work corporate officers must now determine how their $500 million maternity clothing company should react to allegations that it discriminates against pregnant women.

This case was prepared by Carolyn E. Billick and Lusiena H.C. Wong under the direction of James S. O’Rourke, Teaching Professor of Management, as the basis for class discussion rather than to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of an administrative situation. Information was gathered from corporate as well as public sources.

Eugene D. Fanning Center for Business Communication, Mendoza College of Business, University of Notre Dame.

Source: Copyright © 2002. Eugene D. Fanning Center for Business Communication. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, used in a spreadsheet, or transmitted in any form by any means—electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise—without permission.

Matthias earned degrees from MIT, Columbia University, and the University of Pennsylvania. She is the author of Mothers Work: How a Young Mother Started a Business on a Shoestring and Built It into a Multi-Million Dollar Company. Matthias served on the Board of Trustees at Drexel University and Hahnemann MCP Medical University and was a member of the Board of Overseers of the School of Arts and Science at the University of Pennsylvania. 49 On September 16, 2003, Rebecca Matthias was recognized by the United States Small Business Administration at the National Entrepreneurial Conference in Washington, D.C., for her success with Mothers Work. 50

Corporate Communication at Mothers Work

No Corporate Communication division existed at Mothers Work, so many of the communications tasks were undertaken by Rebecca Matthias and Publicity Director Mona Astra Liss. Liss was responsible for all of Mothers Work’s fashion publicity in print and in broadcast. She organized Mothers Work’s fashion shows and other activities promoting the Mothers Work maternity lines. One of Ms. Liss’s initiatives was the creation of A Pea in a Pod’s celebrity program. Famous women such as Cindy Crawford, Sarah Jessica Parker, Toni Braxton, and Claudia Schiffer showcased Mothers Work maternity wear while pregnant.

Ms. Liss has written for The New York Times, The Washington Post, People, and US Weekly and has been featured on the Today Show, Oprah. and E! Entertainment. She is currently working with cable television channel, TBS Superstation, to provide maternity clothing advice to pregnant women. Ms. Liss has been a very prominent individual known for promoting Mothers Work clothing and products. 51

Women in the Workforce

Since 1950, the increase in the percentage of working women has been overwhelming. In 1999 about 60 percent of females 16 years of age and older were in the workforce, an increase of 20 percent since the turn of the twentieth century. Women also accounted for 85 percent of the total increase in the number of workers with more than one job for periods between 1989 and 1999. Labor force participation for women continues to be highest in the 35–44 age groups. 52

Women are working harder as with all Americans. The average full-time worker works about 43 hours per week. For married working women, the number of hours increased from 41 hours in 1989 to 46 hours in 1998. 53 In addition, women also have to take care of their families and so in a way, they are working “double shift.” Balancing between a career and a family can be difficult. As the number of women entering the workforce continues to rise, more businesses are offering services and information to help women find jobs or to better their understanding of maternity rights. A good example of such an information source would be “The 100 Best Companies for Working Mothers List 2003,” 54 a magazine published by Working Mothers.

Pregnancy Discrimination

The Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 was passed as an amendment to Title VII of the Civil Rights of 1964. The act states that “women affected by pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical condition shall be treated the same for all employment-related purposes, including receipt of benefits under fringe benefit programs, as other persons not affected but similar in their ability or inability to work.” 55

Despite the protection offered by the legal system against pregnancy discrimination in the workplace, the number of pregnancy-related discrimination cases is on the rise. Pregnancy discrimination complaints nationwide jumped 10 percent last year to just over 4,700 cases, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Such complaints have increased by approximately 40 percent since 1992. 56

Lawyers, enforcement officials, and workers’ advocates believe that the increase is partly a symptom of widespread layoffs. According to Will Hannum, an Andover, MA, attorney who represents employers in labor matters, the shaky economy has exacerbated the situation as companies try to cope with pressures that sometimes force them to choose which employees to keep on the payroll. 57

The Family Medical Leave Act

The Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) was passed by the Congress of the United States and signed into law in 1993. That legislation guarantees employees of companies up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave annually for certain medical reasons or for the birth or adoption of a child.

To be eligible, the employer must have 50 or more employees who have worked for the employer at least 12 months and 1,250 hours in the last year. The FMLA requires that employers reinstate employees to their former job or an equivalent job at the end of the leave, and must maintain any group health insurance coverage under the same conditions of coverage and cost-sharing arrangement as if the employee were working during the leave. 58

Massachusetts Medical Leave Act

Besides the Family Medical Leave Act, residents of Massachusetts (the state in which Papageorge filed her lawsuit) receive additional protection from the Massachusetts Maternity Leave Act (MMLA). The MMLA requires that an employee on leave be restored to her previous or a similar position upon her return to employment following leave. That position must have the same status, pay, length of service credit, and seniority as the position the employee held prior to the leave. 59

The MMLA also requires that a maternity leave not affect an employee’s right to receive vacation time, sick leave, bonuses, advancement, seniority, length of service credit, benefits, plans, or programs for which she was eligible at the date of her leave, and any other advantages or rights of her employment incident to her position. Such maternity leave, however, need not be included in the computation of such benefits, rights, and advantages. 60

An employee returning from the leave does not have greater rights in terms of benefits or work conditions over other employees who have been working while the prior employee was on leave. The employer is also not required to reinstate a returning employee to her previous position if other employees of the same caliber and length of service have been laid off during her leave period due to economic conditions or operation changes.

Nothing in the MMLA shall be construed to affect any bargaining agreement, employment agreement, or company policy providing benefits that are greater than, or in addition to, those required under the statute. An employer may grant a longer maternity leave than required under the MMLA. However, if the employer does not intend for full MMLA rights to apply to the period beyond eight weeks, the employer must communicate it clearly to the employee in writing prior to the commencement of the leave. 61

Papageorge’s “Condition”

Cynthia Papageorge began working for Mothers Work, Inc. in 1997 as a district manager for stores in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. 62 In October of 1999, Papageorge was 37 weeks pregnant with her first child when Mothers Work vice president, Frank Mullay, inspected four of Papageorge’s stores unannounced. Mullay found deficiencies in the stores’ housekeeping, made several references to Papageorge’s pregnancy and even suggested that Cynthia could not meet her job requirements as a result of her “condition.”

The lawsuit claims that within several days of the random store inspection, Mullay ordered Papageorge’s supervisor, Jan Dowe, to fire Papageorge on the grounds that Papageorge was pregnant. In an affidavit, Dowe stated she refused to fire Papageorge after company officials told Dowe it would be illegal to let Papageorge go. Dowe met with Mullay and informed him of the illegality of his proposal. He responded with, “There are ways of getting around the law.” 63 Six months later, Papageorge was released after requesting medical leave for a shoulder injury, which was unrelated to her pregnancy. Dowe was also fired for inadequate job performance after taking maternity leave.

Mark Itzkowitz, Papageorge’s lawyer, has claimed, “It seems that pregnant women are subject to termination by virtue of their pregnancy. That position was made known in meetings with managers at Mothers Work. The other women [from the other three lawsuits] were terminated for the same reason.” 64

Discussion Questions
1. 1. What facts in this case appear to be the most important to you?

2. 2. Who are the key stakeholders in this case? How will a verdict for or against Papageorge affect the parties?

3. 3. What actions (if any) should Mothers Work, Inc. take? What message should the company send to the public? Who is Mothers Work’s target audience?

4. 4. What are the critical issues of this case? Which issues should Mothers Work confront first?

5. 5. Since there is no Corporate Communications department, who should deliver Mothers Work’s message? What media should Mothers Work use to convey its position?

6. 6. This lawsuit has not received much media attention (since the original filing of the suit). Why do you think this is the case?

Diversity Case Update: Mothers Work, Inc

In 2007, Mothers Work, Inc. agreed to pay $375,000 to settle a lawsuit charging that the company discriminated against pregnant applicants and employees and retaliated against an employee who complained. Filed by the Miami office of the EEOC, the lawsuit charged that the company refused to hire pregnant applicants at its store in St. Augustine, Florida. The EEOC also charged that when assistant store manager LaShonda Burns complained about discriminatory hiring, she was disciplined and that Burns was fired when the company believed she was pregnant. In response, Rebecca Matthias maintained: “I strongly believe that our success as a maternity company depends on fair treatment of every Mothers Work team member and applicant. I was shocked and upset at the allegations raised in this lawsuit and we vehemently deny the implication that as a Company we have a policy to discriminate against pregnant women.”

Source: Mothers Work Announces Settlement of EEOC Lawsuit and Groundbreaking “Employment Secret Shopping” Program