id	author	title	date	pages	extension	mime	words	sentence	flesch	summary	cache	txt
cjgl-2730	Simon, Eliza H.	Parity by Comparison: The Case for Comparing Pregnant and Disabled Workers	2015	48	.pdf	application/pdf	18239	738	51	84 Young, 135 S. Ct. at 1348 (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(k) (2012)) (emphasis in original quotation). 85 Id. at 1349. 30.1 267 COLUMBIA JOURNAL OF GENDER AND LAW workers only in respect to the work limitations that they suffer?8 6 Or might courts, when deciding who the relevant 'other persons' are, .. consider other similarities and differences as well?87 The parties in Young adopted almost polar opposite positions on these questions, and the Court rejected them both.88 Young argued that the second clause of the PDA required employers to provide the same accommodations to pregnant workers with impairments that they extended to some workers with impairments unrelated to pregnancy, even if other similarly impaired, non-pregnant workers would not be accommodated.9 The Court found that Young's approach would unwarrantedly grant pregnant workers a 'most-favored- nation' status, requiring employers to accommodate pregnant workers any time they provided even one or two workers with an accommodation. But it is apparent even now that future pregnancy discrimination plaintiffs' cases will likely hinge on comparisons between pregnant workers and non-pregnant workers with similar impairments.	cache/cjgl-2730.pdf	txt/cjgl-2730.txt