ACLU files discrimination suit against Detroit police

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Michigan has filed a federal lawsuit against the Detroit Police Department (DPD) on behalf of five officers who were forced to take unpaid leave while pregnant.

The complaint filed with the court points to a change in policy in 2004 that prevents officers from being assigned to “desk duty” during their pregnancy, forcing them to exhaust their sick days and go on unpaid leave:

Prior to 2004, DPD maintained a longstanding informal policy and practice of ensuring that light duty assignments were provided to officers who had medical conditions or injuries that temporarily prevented them from performing the full range of confrontational police duties.

Under this policy, officers who became pregnant were placed in restricted duty positions until they opted to use leave or were required by their own medical professionals to discontinue work to give birth …

The current DPD policy, which has been in effect since 2004, provides that officers who advise DPD of pregnancy are to be treated like officers who incur non-duty related injuries or medical conditions.

As such, when the DPD learns that an officer is pregnant, the officer is placed on unpaid sick leave.

Per the latest policy, pregnant officers are not offered light duty positions, as before, but are to be placed on a waiting list for light duty positions, where seniority determines the order of priority on the list.

While on sick leave, only those officers who have accrued personal or sick time are paid a salary, and this payment continues only until the accrued time is exhausted. Moreover, pregnant officers do not accrue seniority for favorable positions and promotions; they are excluded from testing for future promotions; and they may be denied certain benefits including health insurance, among other things.

Pursuant to DPD’s policy, pregnant officers can be restored to duty after being placed on sick leave only by presenting a doctor’s note attesting to the ability to perform all of the duties of a patrol officer, including “use body force to gain entrance through barriers,” “jump down from elevated surfaces,” “crawl in confined areas,” and “effect an arrest, forcibly if necessary.”

However, on information and belief, there are numerous officers working full duty for DPD who are currently unable to perform all of the duties of a patrol officer, and such officers’ inability is plainly apparent to DPD supervisors.

The plaintiffs contend that this is unlawful discrimination that punishes female officers for getting pregnant. And that it hinders their opportunities to advance in the profession by reducing their longevity and seniority.

In a press release announcing the suit, Kary Moss said, “Through this discriminatory policy, the Department forces pregnant officers to choose between their careers and their families — a choice that’s both illegal and unfair. The DPD denies desk duty positions to pregnant police officers just because they are pregnant, while it offers those same positions to chosen male officers. Although the five women we represent were perfectly able to work, they were forced home early in their pregnancies and were forced to rely on banked sick days or go unpaid.”

The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.