“Words are the essential tools of the law. In the study of law, language has great importance; cases turn on the meaning that judges ascribe to words, and lawyers must use the right words to effectuate the wishes of their clients.”—Professor Sheila Hyatt, University of Denver-Sturm College of Law
“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”—George Orwell
Once again I see the word, breastfeeding, corrupted by the common belief that breast-milk feeding is equivalent to breastfeeding. This time it is in a proposed law at the US House of Representatives (HR#3110) and the Senate (S#1658). The proposed bill is called The Pump Act (described in the media) or The Pump for Nursing Mothers Act (described in the legislation). This bill states, “An Act to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to expand access to breastfeeding accommodations in the workplace, and for other purposes.”
I decided to look for breastfeeding accommodations in this proposed legislation, and read nothing about “breastfeeding.” The two main points of this proposed bill (the 3rd amended text, October 22, 2021) are, “An employer shall provide—(1) a reasonable breaktime for an employee to express breast milk each time such employee has need to express breast milk for the 2-year period beginning on the date on which the circumstances related to such need arise, and (2) a place other than a bathroom, that is shielded from view and free from intrusion from co-workers and the public, which may be used by an employee to express breast milk.” This 3rd version proposed from the House has changed from the 2nd version. Instead of companies with less than 25 employees are exempted from the proposed law, it now states companies with less than 50 employees are exempted from the proposed bill. It still states that mothers qualify for a 2-year period of breastfeeding. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3110/text
The Senate’s version of this proposed legislation (#1658) varies from the House of Representatives 3rd version in one major provision. It states that mothers qualify for a 1-year period of breastfeeding not 2-years as proposed by the House bill. The Senate’s version appears to be identical (in regard to these 2 issues) to the legislation in the Affordable Care Act of 2010. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/1658/text?r=77&s=1
Will reconciliation of the proposed bills in the House and Senate, if passed, result in 1-year or 2-years? I will be pleasantly surprised, if a 2-year period for pumping breast milk is accepted. I was amazed that mothers donating breast milk was not listed specifically as a reason for pumping. Employers might not like the idea of a mom taking time out from her job with them to make money (if donating to for-profit milk banks) from her breast milk.
This proposed law does not require that the employer pay the employee for breaks, unless the employee is required to also work during said breaks. Federal law mandates that employers must pay for short, allowed, breaks of employees during the day; and lunch breaks must be paid, if employees are required to work thru their lunch. Although, there is no Federal law that requires employers to provide lunch and rest breaks. Federal laws take precedence over State laws. But what about states, like the one I live in, Florida, in which employers don’t have to provide either rest or lunch breaks? If the employee is not allowed any breaks, then I would assume this proposed law does not apply to them. Currently there are only about 20 States that have break laws, and only 9 that mandate lunch and rest breaks. https://quickbooks.intuit.com/time-tracking/flsa/labor-laws-breaks/
Is this proposed bill truly about breastfeeding accommodations? This appears to me to only be about accommodations for breast-milk feeding. Does pumping ultimately encourage breastfeeding?
According to a paper entitled, “Breastfeeding and the Affordable Care Act,” by Hawkins et al., statistically mothers who are employed fulltime have a shorter duration of breastfeeding than non-working mothers. Mothers who have maternity leave of 12 weeks or less are less likely to even initiate breastfeeding. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4555840/
From my perspective wouldn’t paid maternity leave of at least 6 months encourage breastfeeding initiation and duration rates? Why is our society so hell-bent on separating mothers and babies? This lack of recognition of the physical and emotional toll of separated moms and babies is an example of how women and children are treated in a capitalistic society.
This legislation supposedly about breastfeeding accommodations brings to my mind the following question. What about a mom who would like to breastfeed her baby during breaks? Some employed moms have caregivers that are willing to bring the baby to the employed mom so that she could breastfeed. If this became an acceptable practice, more women and their employers might consider it. They might even consider having childcare facilities within their buildings, or close-by. This would in some cases alleviate the need for pumping so much.
I am curious about the role of breast pump companies in regard to “breastfeeding accommodation” legislation. For instance back in 2017, Representative Carolyn Maloney, is pictured with breastfeeding advocates in support of a proposed bill,”Supporting Working Moms Act.” This appears to be similar to the Pump Act bill proposal of 2021. I find it interesting that among the breastfeeding advocates pictured with Representative Maloney is a Medela representative and someone from a company (that sells/rents breast pumps) YummyMummy on the internet. https://maloney.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/rep-maloney-joins-with-moms-and-advocates-to-support-mothers-rights-to
It is not surprising to me that a breast pump company and a company that sells a variety of breast pumps were supporters of the previous proposed bill. After all, business is a priority in our society. Legislation certainly reflects that priority. Words are important within the legal system. Should we be surprised that our system of law-making considers breastfeeding and breast-milk feeding the same thing?
There is nothing in the current proposed law which is truly making breastfeeding accommodations. Should we believe that all or most of the moms pumping in the workplace are able to breastfeed at home. How much time does a full-time working mom have at home to feed her family, pump her breasts, and breastfeed her infant? And most working moms are still doing the majority of household chores, too. Which obligation at home do mothers give up in order to make life less stressful?
I found this interesting article in regard to Medela from Bloomberg Business Week entitled, “How Medela Lost Moms,” by Esme E. Deprez. According to the author, Medela in US profited greatly for a couple of years because of the Affordable Care Act passage in 2010. After 2 years, many more pumps companies came into existence because the Affordable Care Act legislated that some pumps could be paid for by health insurance companies. The following statement, “A new mother’s relationship with the brand often starts almost as soon as her baby is born, backed by the hospital’s seal of approval: A nurse or lactation consultant parks a $2000 Medela breast pump by her bedside, places a silicone Medela protector over her inverted nipples, and provides relief from chafing with a packet of Medela lanolin.” https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-12-09/how-medela-known-for-its-breast-pumps-lost-its-monopoly-on-moms
Reading that very long sentence in the above article, I thought one could replace the words, Medela and breast pump, with the name of any infant formula company. The infant formula industry often use these tactics of making moms believe that anything they see or get in the hospital is medically approved. Hospital approved/doctor approved is a real old advertising tactic. And sadly it works.
The influence of companies in creating legislation, and their product placement influence in hospitals is great. I remember a teen mom asking me some years ago, why would the nurses give her a case of formula, when she didn’t need it? Why are nurses parking breast pumps in front of mothers who just gave birth? Convenience?
While I do not know, if pump companies influenced this current piece of proposed legislation; I think it an odd coincidence that breastfeeding accommodations are only about breast-milk feeding in the workplace. This proposed bill does not help moms who work in jobs like restaurants where breaks only happen during slow times. In breastfeeding and the Affordable Care Act, the authors’ state, “In fact, research demonstrates that the proportion of women protected by comprehensive breastfeeding policies in the workplace varied widely between states.” I don’t see how the Pump Act resolves this very crucial issue of State variability of protection or how this bill creates breastfeeding accommodations in the workplace.
Copyright 2021 Valerie W. McClain
