Page 16 - CLT081020

16 ¦ AUGUST 10, 2020 NEWS

At Hearing, Jones Day Partner Defends
Leave Policy Against Bias Claims

By Dan Packel
ANew York-based Jones Day partner defend-
ed the firm’s parental leave policy Tuesday
against allegations that it discriminates
against fathers by giving them eight fewer weeks
than mothers, telling a Washington, D.C., federal
judge that the leave policy in question is tied directly
to the physical costs of child birth.
At a telephonic hearing, partner Traci Lovitt told
U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss that a careful
reading of the firm’s short-term disability policy
should lead to a swift end to the claims from former
associates Mark Savignac and Julia Sheketoff.
Jones Day’s Atlanta headquarters.

“It’s not sex-based,” Lovitt said of the policy. “The Photo: John Disney/ALM

disability correlates with pregnancy. Just because was justified in its guiding assumption that, absent
you’re a woman, you don’t get short-term disability a contrary certification from a doctor, women who
leave. You get disability leave be- give birth are affected by a post-
cause you had a child.” partum-related disability for the
Savignac and Sheketoff, who following eight weeks.
met while clerking for U.S. Su- Questioned by Moss about why
preme Court Justice Stephen “It’s not sex-based,” partner adoptive parents of both genders
Breyer, sued the firm in August Traci Lovitt said of the eight received 18 weeks of leave, Lo-
2019, arguing that the firm’s pol- weeks of leave available to vitt emphatically responded that
icy, which provides 18 weeks of mothers who give birth but adoptive parents and birth par-
leave for mothers who give birth not to men. “Just because ents were not similarly situated,
and adoptive parents of all gen- citing foreign travel burdens and
ders, but only 10 weeks of leave you’re a woman, you don’t unique attachment issues.
for fathers, is discriminatory. get short-term disability
leave. You get disability “The reasons for their leave
They also contend that while at leave because you had a are completely different from the
the firm, Sheketoff ’s compensa- leave policies for birth parents,”
tion was negatively affected by a child.” she said.

harsh evaluation from a male part- Moss seemed inclined to heed
ner, a review she said revealed that Savignac and Sheketoff ’s con-
he expected a degree of deference tention that the comparison was
from her that he did not seek from informative.
male associates. Further, they allege that Savignac “The argument here isn’t that there’s discrimina-
was the subject of retaliation when he was fired after tion between adoptive parents and birth parents,” he
Sheketoff raised concerns about the leave policy. said. “The argument is that the policy with adoption
Tuesday’s hearing focused primarily on the terms is evidence to which the plaintiffs refer to to sup-
of the policy itself, with Lovitt arguing that the firm port their contention that the additional eight weeks

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune