‘Boss Bill’ Passes New York Senate Committee

A bill that would make it illegal for employers to discriminate against their employees because of their reproductive health-care decisions is headed for a possible vote on the floor of the New York Senate after clearing a labor committee Tuesday.

S 6578A, sponsored by Sen. Liz Krueger (D-Manhattan), has been nicknamed the “Boss Bill” by supporters. The proposed law would update New York’s existing workplace anti-discrimination laws to prohibit an employer from discriminating against an employee on the basis of their reproductive health decisions. This would include decisions to use any medication, medical device, or other medical service. It would also prohibit discrimination based on an employer’s personal beliefs about such services.

Sen. Krueger told RH Reality Check that she feels this is an important bill to introduce because current state law does not protect people from employment discrimination for reproductive health-care decisions. Citing the Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby case currently being decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, Krueger said if employers are allowed to deny access to reproductive health care then there is nothing preventing an employer from firing an employee for reproductive health-care decisions.

There currently are dozens of lawsuits by employers who claim the Affordable Care Act requirement to provide birth control coverage in health insurance plans violates their personal and religious beliefs.

“This law would not be specific to women, it would be men and women,” said Krueger. While much of the focus around reproductive health care centers on abortion and birth control, Krueger says the law is designed to include protections for the full range of reproductive health-care decisions, from individuals who choose to have children outside of marriage to men who choose to have vasectomies.

Krueger is optimistic about the bill’s chances of being passed by the Repubican-controlled senate. While senate Republicans previously blocked a bill to expand access to abortion care in the state, Krueger thinks her bill may have a less challenging path to becoming law. “If it comes to the floor I believe it will pass, based on conversations I’ve had with Republican colleagues,” she said.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

For more information or to schedule an interview with contact press@rhrealitycheck.org.

Follow Teddy Wilson on twitter: @txindyjourno

  • blfdjlj

    What a ridiculous law. Employers should have a right to choose who they give jobs to, and this law can only lead to frivolous lawsuits. How would an employer know that a worker had a vasectomy, and why would he care in the first place?

    This really seems to be a solution in search of a problem.

    • lady_black

      Didn’t read the article, did you? Reproductive choices are not limited to vasectomy.

      • Roseann Sorrentino

        he’s not talking about limitation. he’s talking about just a plain ol’ vasectomy we know darn well that reproductive choices are not limited to vasectomies

        • lady_black

          There is no reason for anyone to ever know someone had a vasectomy. But they are sure going to know if you carry a pregnancy to term out of wedlock, aren’t they? I know you like playing stupid, like pretending you aren’t paying for anyone’s “sexual decision making” except when they use contraceptives or have an abortion. Having a baby single is not a firing offense. Like the article says, EVERYONE’S reproductive choices would be covered. Not just those of men.

    • Roseann Sorrentino

      I agree with you. no employer should care about someone’s sexual needs. or decisions I also see noticing that this site is called: Reproductive and Sexual Health and Justice. If so, where is the health for women when we know through testimonies women can survive better in an emergency c-section procedure, rather than prepping for an abortion? More women have been being killed in abortion while their child is also being aborted. Trust me as a pro-choice follower I have understood how abortion works and even if it is done safely, it is still not safe. Doctors have even infected their patients with hepatitis etc. NEW YORK STATE clinics have failed inspections in abortion clinics. More pro-choicers are on our side not because we think abortion is wrong. BECAUSE, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. 24 weeks is what NEW YORK ALLOWS. And we still want to expand that. After even 13 weeks every part of the body can be developed. That is where most pro-choicers draw the line. If you can relate to the fetus because we all once were you stop killing the fetus.
      I hope all find the right direction.

      • lady_black

        You lie. Legal abortion is very safe. Much safer than pregnancy and birth.

      • Arekushieru

        Then tell that to my sibling who wouldn’t be here if our mother hadn’t had an abortion prior to that pregnancy. Oops.

        Cites for your claims, please, then I will provide cites for my claims that explain why pregnancy and childbirth are the third leading cause of death, together, for women, WORLDWIDE. Oops.

        Many pregnant women may get infected in hospitals far more easily than those who are having an abortion in a legal abortion clinic. Including those in developing countries. What about the inspections of THOSE hospitals?

        Did you read the article, either? Whether or not the state cut-off is 24 weeks is entirely IRRELEVANT. Besides, in Canada, there is NO cut-off and women’s rights aren’t handled provincially as if state rights are more important than human rights. Oops.

        The level of development of a fetus is irrelevant to the legality of abortion. So, because a rapist is a human being once we realize that we are also human beings we will stop using deadly force to defend ourselves from rape? Because that’s EXACTLY what you’re saying.

        I hope all find the right direction. Which is most ADMITTEDLY not yours.

      • cjvg

        -“we know through testimonies women can survive better in an emergency c-section procedure, rather than prepping for an abortion” That is a ridiculous unsupportable lie.

        -“24 weeks is what NEW YORK ALLOWS. And we still want to expand that”

        Another unsupported lie, no one has ever introduced a law attempting to expand abortion past 24 weeks, which is viability. After 24 weeks it would be an inductions resulting in a life birth and even an induction will only be done if the live of the mother is in grave danger!

        -“After even 13 weeks every part of the body can be developed” except it is not, unless you belief that the brain etc are not a part of the body. When a fetus is fully formed and everything is working they can survive outside of the womb, why do you think it is patently impossible for a 13 week fetus to survive?!

        Childbirth and pregnancy have a 14 times higher risk of death for the woman. Every abortion is the best medical choice when claiming respect for life as your main motivator. Abortion is the one choice that offers the best chance to protect the woman’s life and health! Yes, women are actually a life and as such do deserve respect for their lives!

        Purporting that “respect” for life precludes you from providing abortion care is thus a hypocritical position that completely discards respect for the existing life before you (the woman), in favour of the potential life (the embryo/fetus) that might never realize!
        You are lying through your teeth, you have not even a modicum of medical knowledge and it shows. At least have the decency to use real or even believable claims’ You are as ANTI_CHOICE as they come! Nice try to insinuate that you are pro- choice by stating that you are a pro-choice “follower”. Probably the only true thing you have state, a follower alright but completely anti choice and not above using absurd and medically as well as scientifically impossible claims
        And here is the reality of childbirth versus abortion, as researched and documented by real doctors who use facts instead of lies!:

        14 times more women die or are injured from childbirth and pregnancy then from abortions! The complete study can be found in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology: June 2012 – Volume 119 – Issue 6 – p1271–1272
        The Comparative Safety of Legal Induced Abortion and Childbirth in the United States, Raymond, Elizabeth G. MD, MPH; Grimes, David A. MD

        Some excerpts;
        -“Researchers found that women were about 14 times more likely to die during or after giving birth to a live baby than to die from complications of an abortion.”

        -“The researchers on the new study combined government data on live births and pregnancy- and abortion-related deaths with legal abortions performed in the U.S. from the Guttmacher Institute, which conducts sexual and reproductive health research and education.”

        -“Dr. Elizabeth Raymond from Gynuity Health Projects in New York City and Dr. David Grimes of the University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, found that between 1998 and 2005, one woman died during childbirth for every 11,000 or so babies born.”
        -“That compared to one woman of every 167,000 who died from a legal abortion.”

        -“In their report, published in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology, The Dr’s Raymond and Grimes write that the findings aren’t surprising given that women are pregnant for a lot longer when they decide to have a baby and so have more time to develop complications.”

        -“Dr Harwood said previous studies have also shown the safety of legal abortions.”

        -“Harwood said that laws regarding what’s said between the doctor and a woman seeking an abortion often hamper doctors’ attempts to inform patients in a medically sound, accurate and balanced way, increasing the risk of complications”

        -” the new report, which helps dispel “misinformation” and “lies” about abortion risks included in some state laws — such as the idea that abortion is linked to cancer.”

        -“a study from the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) which found that, from 1998 to 2001, the most common complications associated with pregnancy — including high blood pressure, urinary tract infections and mental health conditions — happened more often in women who had a live birth than those who got an abortion.” http://www.cdc.gov/

        All the medical research agrees, providing an abortion is fully complying with the Hippocratic Oath, there is actually a very good case to be made that to recommend continuing a pregnancy is recklessly and willfully endangering the patients life!

        Obviously these sites and these researchers are all respected fully licensed health care professionals and doctors, so you might want to dismiss their knowledge as irrelevant in favor of your anti-choice sites since they are more likely to agree with your lies and inane claims

  • Roseann Sorrentino

    Yes I feel that it is a ridiculous law, because one, your employer has nothing to do with your personal sexual activities, THEREFORE should not apply in your health insurance unless YOU are having children. Children equals more people within 16-20 years, MORE people in the work force. HELLO, Does any in planned parenthood EVEN get that?? Or are they just dumbfounded and do not think on their own? They must have everyone else pay for their decision and okay, they feel it’s wrong for them to make their own decisions apparently. So they want us TAX payers who pay into public health insurances and also who help these companies or EMPLOYERS to help pay for their employees insurances. We as tax payers should not have to pay for Joe Schmoe’s or Jane Doe’s sexual decision making. WE pay for OUR OWN sexual decision making. Makes sense right? Please Senators and GOVERNOR, MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION :-/ Paying for other’s decisions is like we’re paying for them to kill someone especially if abortion is still on the bill. So are we hiring hitmen? No, but figuratively that is what it is. Paying taxes to pay the clinics to have women get their abortions. SAD. :-(
    Love all. Hate the sin, love the sinner. <3

    • lady_black

      What you ignore is that we’re already paying for every Joe Schmoe and Jane Doe’s sexual decision making every time they make a baby. You just want to pick and choose which sexual decisions you’ll pay for, and that isn’t fair to those who choose not to breed. Get over yourselves. You’re no special snowflake. Personally, I’d rather pay for their birth control, but I don’t begrudge paying for childbirth. Get the point? We aren’t really in great need of “more people” in 16-20 years. We don’t have the jobs to support everyone who wants to work now.

    • Arekushieru

      Apparently you don’t understand how employee insurance works. Not only that, apparently you don’t understand that your taxes pay for aggressive military maneuvers in foreign countries that also end up killing more civilians than combatants. But you’re perfectly fine with that, I’m sure…..

      Also, one cannot merely love the sinner but hate the sin. It’s impossible. After all, I admit that I don’t just hate misogyny, but I hate all misogynistic douchebags, as well.

    • Suba gunawardana

      Very simply: If it’s fine for us to pay for others to breed, it should also be fine to pay for others to refrain from breeding.

      If you want to the right to refuse to pay for contraception & abortion, others should have the right to refuse to pay for breeding. If that happens, guess who would lose out? Birth is far more expensive than birth control.

    • cjvg

      Well if an employer should have nothing to do with your sexual activities, what is your problem with this law?

      Obviously it would just be one more law that is never used, so what are you objecting to it being on the books for? It is not like there are not plenty of other laws on the books that are never used!

      Seems you are just looking to have a problem with something that is (according to you) never going to be used