Settlement Reached in Contraceptive Coverage Lawsuit
A federal district court in Seattle approved a settlement earlier this month in the class-action lawsuit Erickson v Bartell, filed in 2000 on behalf of employees of the Bartell drugstore chain who alleged that the exclusion of prescription contraceptives coverage in their health insurance constituted sex discrimination (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964). Under the settlement—which dismisses Bartell’s appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court, class members who are current Bartell employees are exempt from making co-payments on prescription contraceptives and related services through 2006. Class members formerly employed at Bartell will receive a $100 reimbursement. The company will continue covering contraceptives and related services in its health plan, per a 2001 federal district court ruling.
Women of reproductive age throughout the US continue to pay more out-of-pocket health care costs than men because of reproductive health expenses not covered by insurance plans, according to PPFA. “Contraception is basic health care,” said PPFA President Gloria Feldt. “Studies indicate that most Americans believe prescription contraception should be covered. It’s time for corporations… to do what is right for the health of America’s women.”
In recent years, AT&T, Dow Jones, and Wal-Mart have all faced lawsuits from employees demanding coverage for prescription contraceptives.
Media Resources: PPFA 3/4/03; Feminist Daily News Wire
10/21/2014 Afghanistan's New First Lady Advances Women's Issues - Just a few days after moving to the presidential palace, Afghanistan's new First Lady Rula Ghani said that she hopes to encourage greater respect for women.
Rula Ghani already broke tradition by participating in her husband, Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai's, campaign for President. . . .
10/21/2014 Hulu Silences Rape Survivor Speaking Out Against Anti-Abortion Amendment 67 in Colorado - Hulu, an online, ad-supported streaming service, has refused to run an advertisement from the "No on 67" campaign in Colorado, citing the company's policy regarding "controversial" political positions on issues like abortion.
In a letter to the CEO of Hulu, dated October 10, the Vote No on 67 Campaign, which is supported by the Feminist Majority Foundation, asked the company to reconsider its unwillingness to air a 35-second spot featuring a rape survivor's testimony about the far-reaching impact of Colorado's proposed Amendment 67. . . .