article_snippet: Writing on behalf of the majority, liberal Justice Stephen Breyer said The Supreme Court is required to determine if the employer had 'legitimate, nondiscriminatory, nonpretextual justification' for treating employees differently.
article_snippet: liberal Justice Stephen Breyer said The Supreme Court failed to consider the effects of UPS policies that covered non-pregnant workers who might have disabilities, injuries or otherwise might need accommodations, and asked, 'Why, when the employer accommodated so many, could it not accommodate pregnant women as well?'
article_snippet: liberal Justice Stephen Breyer said there is a 'genuine dispute as to whether UPS provided more favorable treatment to at least some employees whose situation cannot reasonably be distinguished from Peggy Young's'.
article_snippet: The outcome reflects a 'middle ground' that Justice Elena Kagan suggested during arguments in early December.
article_snippet: Courts must now re-examine Young's case with a more accepting view of the discrimination claim.
article_snippet: must now re-examine Young's case with a more accepting view of the discrimination claim.
article_snippet: The two sides in Courts must now re-examine Young's case with a more accepting view of the discrimination claim disagreed over whether UPS agreed to accommodate non-pregnant workers requesting light-duty assignments.
article_snippet: Courts must now re-examine Young's case with a more accepting view of the discrimination claim concerned whether the package delivery company violated a federal law, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, by denying Young's request.
article_snippet: Young left UPS in 2009.
article_snippet: In recent months, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has updated guidance to employers to make clear that employers should accommodate people in Young's situation.
article_snippet: The justices found in Young's favor on Wednesday .