dictionary

Jennifer Erickson sued her employer because its health plan did not cover birth control.

SEATTLE, Washington (CNN) -- A federal judge ruled a company guilty of sexual discrimination Tuesday for not including birth control in its comprehensive health plan.

The ruling came in a lawsuit filed by pharmacist Jennifer Erickson, 27, against her employer, Bartell Drugs.

It was the first federal challenge against a employer over the issue of birth control.

In summary judgment, U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik found that Bartell's plan discriminates against its "female employees by providing less complete coverage than that offered to male employees."

MESSAGE BOARD

Health care reform

"Although the plan covers almost all drugs and devices used by men, " he wrote, "the exclusion of prescription contraceptives creates a gaping hole in the coverage offered to female employees, leaving a fundamental and immediate health-care need uncovered. ...

	LEGAL RESOURCES
Latest Legal News
Law Library
FindLaw Consumer Center Select a topic Bankruptcy Discrimination Divorce Estate Planning Landlord-Tenant Personal Injury Taxes

"Title VII [of the Civil Rights Act of 1964] requires employers to recognize the differences between the sexes and provide equally comprehensive coverage, even if that means providing additional benefits to cover women-only expenses,"

Lasnik ordered Bartell to cover each of the available options for prescription contraception as well as contraception-related services.

Erickson is "pleased with the decision," she said in a written statement.

Eighty percent of employers who offer HMO plans to their employees include some form of contraception as part of the plan, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.