Checklist · Labor and Employment

Accommodating Pregnancy and Nursing Under the PWFA and PUMP Act: A Practical Checklist

42 U.S.C. § 2000

Type: Checklist
Jurisdiction: National
Date: 2024-07-03
Topic: Labor and Employment

This checklist walks an employer through its obligations to pregnant and nursing workers under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) and the PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act, and how those laws stack with the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Title VII, the ADA, and the FMLA. It covers who is covered, what a "known limitation related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions" means, and how to run the interactive process — including the four "predictable assessments" the EEOC says are almost always reasonable. It maps the limits on delay, denial, and forced leave, and the narrow undue-hardship defense. It then details the PUMP Act's break-time and private-space requirements for nursing employees, plus notice, posting, policy drafting, documentation, and anti-retaliation practice. A running example follows a fictional grocery-warehouse employer, Harvest Grocers, accommodating a pregnant picker and a returning nursing employee. This is the working checklist companion to UpLaw's guide on pregnancy discrimination and accommodation after the PWFA.

Accommodating Pregnancy and Nursing Under the PWFA and PUMP Act: A Practical Checklist

Labor and Employment > Leave and Accommodation | Published 3 July 2024 - Updated 30 May 2025 | UpLaw - uplaw.us

Since June 2023, "no" is rarely a lawful first answer to a pregnant worker who asks for a stool, a water bottle, or a lighter lifting load. The PWFA flipped the default: reasonable accommodation is now the rule, forced leave is the trap, and the interactive process is not optional. Here is how to get it right — start to finish.

Keywords: PWFA, PUMP Act, pregnancy accommodation, lactation breaks, interactive process, known limitation, undue hardship, predictable assessments, Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Title VII, ADA, FMLA, anti-retaliation, employee handbook

How to use this checklist

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg et seq., took effect on June 27, 2023, and the EEOC's final rule implementing it, 29 C.F.R. Part 1636, took effect June 18, 2024. Together with the PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act, 29 U.S.C. § 218d, these two statutes rebuilt the floor under pregnant and nursing workers. If your last mental model of this area was "pregnancy is covered only when it looks like a disability," update it now: the PWFA is a standalone accommodation mandate that borrows the ADA's machinery but is deliberately more generous.

This is a do-the-task checklist. Work through the phases in order when a pregnancy- or lactation-related request lands, then keep the consolidated list at the end near your intake process. Each phase has real check items and a short "Why it matters, and the traps" note. A running example — Harvest Grocers, a fictional regional grocery chain with a distribution warehouse — makes the doctrine concrete.

For the doctrinal deep dive behind this checklist, read UpLaw's companion article, Pregnancy Discrimination and Accommodation After the PWFA. For where these obligations sit in the broader employment-law lifecycle, see The Employment Law Toolkit: From Hiring to Separation.

Phase 1 — Map the statutory stack before you decide anything

[ ] Identify which statutes are in play: PWFA (accommodation for pregnancy/childbirth-related limitations), PUMP Act (lactation break time and space), PDA/Title VII (anti-discrimination), ADA (disability accommodation), and FMLA (job-protected leave).
[ ] Confirm employer size for each law separately — coverage thresholds differ (see Phase 2).
[ ] Treat the PWFA as the floor, not the ceiling: a more generous state or local pregnancy-accommodation law, and any collective-bargaining agreement, still applies.
[ ] Ask which law gives the worker the most protection for this specific request, and comply with that one. The laws stack; they do not cancel each other out.
[ ] Flag whether an FMLA leave entitlement runs concurrently with any accommodation (e.g., extended recovery leave).

Why it matters, and the traps. These five regimes overlap but do different jobs, and the biggest mistake employers make is analyzing a request under only one of them. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act amended Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(k), to make discrimination "because of or on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions" a form of sex discrimination — but the PDA is fundamentally a comparative anti-discrimination rule, not an affirmative accommodation mandate. Under Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 575 U.S. 206 (2015), a pregnant worker denied light duty had to show the employer accommodated others "similar in their ability or inability to work"; that comparator fight was hard and unpredictable. The PWFA was Congress's answer: it imposes an affirmative duty to accommodate "known limitations" regardless of whether any comparator exists, closing the gap Young left open. The ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12112, still matters because a pregnancy-related condition (gestational diabetes, preeclampsia, severe complications) may independently qualify as a disability — but the PWFA reaches ordinary, non-disabling pregnancy needs the ADA never touched. The FMLA, 29 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq., supplies job-protected leave for the birth and bonding but is not an accommodation statute. And the PUMP Act governs the distinct, post-birth question of expressing breast milk at work. The trap is answering a lactation-break question under the FMLA, or a light-duty question under the ADA's stricter "disability" screen, and denying something the PWFA plainly requires.

For how leave entitlements interlock with accommodation, see Maternity and Parental Leave Policies: Five Things Employers Should Know Before Drafting.

Phase 2 — Confirm coverage: the employer, the worker, and the "known limitation"

[ ] Confirm PWFA coverage: applies to private and public employers with 15 or more employees (same threshold as Title VII/ADA).
[ ] Confirm PUMP Act coverage: applies broadly to FLSA-covered employers, but employers with fewer than 50 employees may claim an undue-hardship exemption from the break-time obligation (evaluated by the specific hardship, not a blanket pass).
[ ] Confirm the worker is an employee (or applicant) — not an independent contractor — before applying either statute.
[ ] Confirm the request concerns a known limitation "related to, affected by, or arising out of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions."
[ ] Note that the limitation need not rise to an ADA disability, and may be "modest, minor, or episodic."
[ ] Note the PWFA also covers limitations related to seeking or recovering from an abortion, miscarriage, stillbirth, lactation, and fertility/IVF treatment — the "related medical conditions" phrase is read broadly.
[ ] Confirm the worker can, with reasonable accommodation, perform the essential functions — OR qualifies for the PWFA's unique "temporary suspension of an essential function" rule (Phase 3).

Why it matters, and the traps. "Known limitation" is the PWFA's center of gravity, and it is far more generous than the ADA's "disability." Under the EEOC final rule, 29 C.F.R. Part 1636, a limitation is "known" once the worker (or their representative) communicates it to the employer — no magic words, no doctor's note required to trigger the conversation. The limitation can be a physical or mental condition, and the statute expressly reaches conditions that are "modest, minor, or episodic," such as needing to carry a water bottle, sit instead of stand, or take extra bathroom breaks. Do not demand medical proof for the obvious. The classification question also matters because the PWFA is an employee protection: if the worker is genuinely a contractor, the analysis changes — run that threshold carefully using Classifying Workers: Employee or Independent Contractor — A Practical Checklist. The other trap is the size threshold: an employer with 40 employees is covered by the PWFA but might mistakenly assume it is too small.

Worked example. Marisol, a warehouse "picker" at Harvest Grocers, is 22 weeks pregnant. She tells her shift lead she can no longer lift the 50-lb pallet cases repeatedly and needs to avoid prolonged standing. She has no diagnosis of a disability. Under the ADA alone, a routine pregnancy without complications might not qualify — but under the PWFA, Marisol's difficulty lifting and standing is a textbook "known limitation related to pregnancy." Harvest is covered (it has 15+ employees), Marisol is an employee, and the accommodation duty is triggered the moment she speaks up. The shift lead's instinct — "we don't have light duty here, take unpaid leave until the baby comes" — is exactly the move the PWFA forbids (Phase 4).

Phase 3 — Run the interactive process and identify the accommodation

[ ] Start an interactive process promptly once a known limitation is communicated — a good-faith, individualized dialogue, the same mechanism the ADA uses.
[ ] Do not require the worker to accept an accommodation they did not request or agree to; the point is to find something that works for the job and the worker.
[ ] Consider the common accommodations the EEOC lists: additional or longer breaks; sitting/standing options; schedule changes, part-time work, or paid/unpaid leave; telework; job restructuring; modified equipment or uniforms; relief from strenuous activities or exposure to unsafe conditions; and temporary reassignment.
[ ] For the "four predictable assessments," grant them in virtually all cases and do not demand supporting documentation: (1) carrying/keeping water near and drinking as needed; (2) taking additional restroom breaks as needed; (3) sitting if the work is done standing, or standing if the work is done sitting; and (4) taking breaks to eat and drink as needed.
[ ] Consider temporarily suspending one or more essential functions — a PWFA-only feature — where the worker can perform the remaining functions and the suspension is for a limited period, with the expectation the worker can resume the function "in the near future."
[ ] Request supporting documentation only when reasonable, and never for the four predictable assessments, self-evident limitations, or the accommodations a worker states are needed for lactation.

Why it matters, and the traps. The interactive process is the load-bearing wall of any accommodation defense. Skipping it — jumping straight to "granted" or "denied" without dialogue — is itself evidence of bad faith. The four predictable assessments are the single most useful practical rule in the EEOC regulation: the agency has effectively pre-decided that water, restroom breaks, sitting/standing, and eating/drinking breaks are so minimally burdensome that denying or documenting them is almost never defensible. Train supervisors to say "yes" to those on the spot.

The temporary suspension of an essential function is genuinely new and often misunderstood. Under the ADA, an employee who cannot perform an essential function even with accommodation is simply not "qualified." The PWFA carves out an exception: a worker is still "qualified" if the inability to perform an essential function is temporary, the function could be suspended for a limited period, and the worker could perform it in the near future. That is why "she can't lift, so she can't do the job" is no longer a clean answer.

The documentation rules are a frequent stumble. Employers reflexively demand a doctor's note. The final rule says that for obvious limitations, the four predictable assessments, and lactation-related needs, requiring documentation is itself unreasonable. Where documentation is appropriate, the employer may seek only enough to confirm the limitation and the need for accommodation — not a full medical file.

Worked example. Harvest's HR generalist meets with Marisol. Rather than push her out on leave, they map her job into functions: scanning and routing (fine), light picking of sub-20-lb items (fine), and heavy pallet lifting (the problem). They agree to (a) temporarily reassign the heavy lifting to a rotation of coworkers and a powered lift assist, (b) provide a sit/stand stool at her scan station, and (c) authorize water and restroom breaks as needed — no note required. The heavy-lift suspension is expected to last until roughly six weeks postpartum, when Marisol expects to resume it. This is precisely the "temporary suspension of an essential function" the PWFA contemplates.

Phase 4 — Respect the limits: no unnecessary delay, denial, or forced leave

[ ] Do not unreasonably delay providing an accommodation; unnecessary delay can itself violate the PWFA even if you eventually say yes.
[ ] Do not deny an accommodation, or deny employment/opportunity, based on a need for a reasonable accommodation.
[ ] Do not force the worker onto leave if another reasonable accommodation would let them keep working — leave is a last resort, offered only when no other accommodation is available and only if the worker prefers it.
[ ] Do not require the worker to accept an accommodation other than one arrived at through the interactive process.
[ ] Do not retaliate against, or coerce, a worker for requesting or using an accommodation (see Phase 7).
[ ] Reserve undue hardship as a defense only after the interactive process, and document the individualized analysis.
[ ] Evaluate undue hardship using the ADA-style factors: nature and cost of the accommodation, the employer's overall resources, the size and structure of the operation, and the impact on operations.

Why it matters, and the traps. The PWFA singles out forced leave as a core prohibition because it was the pre-PWFA default abuse: employers would grant "accommodation" by sending pregnant workers home unpaid. The statute makes clear that pushing a worker onto leave when a workable on-the-job accommodation exists is a denial, not an accommodation. Undue hardship is the only real defense, and it is narrow — "significant difficulty or expense" judged against the employer's full resources, not a manager's convenience or a vague fear of setting precedent. For the four predictable assessments, undue hardship will essentially never be established. Delay is the sleeper trap: an accommodation "approved" after a month of stalling can be as actionable as an outright denial, particularly for a time-sensitive pregnancy need.

Worked example. Suppose Harvest's warehouse manager had instead told Marisol, "We can't rejigger the lift rotation — just go on leave until you deliver." With a sit/stand stool, a lift assist, and a coworker rotation plainly available and low-cost, that forced leave would be a textbook PWFA violation: an accommodation existed, Marisol wanted to keep working and earning, and undue hardship could not be shown against a regional chain's resources.

If a dispute escalates and you need to understand exposure, see Damages in Employment Litigation: Back Pay, Statutory Caps, and Punitive Awards.

Phase 5 — Deliver PUMP Act lactation break time and private space

[ ] Provide reasonable break time for an employee to express breast milk each time the employee has need, for up to one year after the child's birth.
[ ] Provide a place, other than a bathroom, that is shielded from view and free from intrusion from coworkers and the public.
[ ] Ensure the space is functional for expressing milk — a place to sit, a flat surface, and (as a best practice) access to electricity and nearby water; a converted bathroom or a bathroom stall does not satisfy the Act.
[ ] Do not require the space to be permanent; a space temporarily created or converted when needed can suffice, as long as it meets the standard each time it is needed.
[ ] Understand pay rules: break time is unpaid unless otherwise required, but if the employee is not completely relieved of duty during the break, that time must be paid (and any time is paid if the employer already provides paid breaks the employee uses to pump).
[ ] Provide these protections to nonexempt and exempt employees alike (the PUMP Act extended coverage beyond the FLSA's nonexempt-only reach).
[ ] For employers with fewer than 50 employees, assess whether compliance imposes undue hardship — but do not assume the exemption; it is judged by significant difficulty or expense relative to the employer's size and resources.
[ ] Remember lactation is also a "related medical condition" under the PWFA and Title VII — accommodations beyond break time and space (e.g., schedule flexibility, storage) may be required.

Why it matters, and the traps. The PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act, 29 U.S.C. § 218d, enacted in December 2022, closed two big gaps in the older FLSA lactation provision: it extended coverage to roughly nine million previously excluded exempt employees, and it gave workers a real remedy for violations. The most common and most litigated failure is the space: a bathroom — even a clean, single-occupancy one — never satisfies the Act. The space must be shielded from view, free from intrusion, and functional. The second trap is pay: the default is that pump breaks are unpaid, but if the employee keeps working — answering emails, monitoring a line — she is not "completely relieved of duty," and the time must be paid. Managers who let an employee "multitask" during a pump break can inadvertently create a wage claim. Third, the small-employer exemption is not automatic; a 40-person employer must actually show significant difficulty or expense, not simply invoke its size.

Worked example. Priya returns to Harvest Grocers as a checkout supervisor eight weeks after giving birth and needs to pump twice per shift. Harvest cannot send her to the customer restroom. It designates a small, lockable inventory office with a chair, a table, an outlet, and a sign, available when she needs it, and confirms she is fully relieved of duty during the breaks (a coworker covers the register), so the breaks may be unpaid under Harvest's policy — but Harvest documents that she is not doing any work during them. Because lactation is also a PWFA "related medical condition," when Priya later asks to shift her lunch 30 minutes to align with her pumping schedule, Harvest treats that as a reasonable-accommodation request too.

Phase 6 — Notice, posting, policy language, and manager training

[ ] Post the updated EEOC "Know Your Rights" poster, which now includes PWFA rights, and any required Department of Labor FLSA/PUMP notices.
[ ] Add or update an accommodation policy in the handbook covering pregnancy, childbirth, related conditions, and lactation — including how to request and who to contact.
[ ] Include a clear anti-retaliation statement and the interactive-process commitment in the policy.
[ ] Train supervisors and shift leads to recognize a request (no magic words), route it to HR, and grant the four predictable assessments on the spot.
[ ] Train managers not to ask disability-style medical questions, demand notes for obvious needs, or suggest leave as the first option.
[ ] Coordinate the policy with your leave, FMLA, and disability-accommodation policies so they cross-reference cleanly.

Why it matters, and the traps. Most PWFA and PUMP failures happen at the front line, not in the HR office — a shift lead who says "we don't do light duty" before anyone with training sees the request. The fix is a clear written policy plus training that teaches managers to escalate rather than decide. The policy also does double duty as evidence of good faith. Build these provisions into a handbook that is internally consistent and legally current; see Building a Legally Sound Employee Handbook and the drafting-desk companion, Drafting an Employee Handbook That Holds Up: A Practical Checklist. A common trap is a stale handbook that still describes pregnancy only under the ADA or PDA and never mentions the PWFA's affirmative duty or the four predictable assessments.

For small employers standing up these policies for the first time, The Small Business Legal Toolkit collects the foundational documents, and The Startup Legal Document Stack: What Founders Need and Why explains where an accommodation and leave policy fits among a company's core documents.

Phase 7 — Document decisions, keep records, and guard against retaliation

[ ] Keep a written record of each request, the interactive-process dialogue, the accommodation provided (or the individualized undue-hardship analysis behind a denial), and dates.
[ ] Store any medical documentation confidentially and separately from the personnel file, consistent with ADA confidentiality practice.
[ ] Do not retaliate: no adverse action for requesting, using, or reporting about an accommodation; the PWFA also prohibits coercion, intimidation, threats, or interference with rights.
[ ] Protect applicants too — you may not deny a job because an applicant will need a reasonable accommodation.
[ ] Watch for subtle retaliation: schedule cuts, worse assignments, exclusion, or a sudden performance write-up following a request.
[ ] If a complaint or dispute arises, run a fair, documented investigation before taking any action.
[ ] Preserve records long enough to cover the applicable limitations periods (PWFA claims follow Title VII's charge-filing framework through the EEOC).

Why it matters, and the traps. Contemporaneous documentation is what turns a defensible decision into a provable one. The interactive-process notes, in particular, rebut the most common allegation — that the employer never engaged. Confidentiality is a separate legal duty: pregnancy and lactation medical information must be kept like ADA medical records, not in the open personnel file. The anti-retaliation and anti-coercion provisions are broad; because the PWFA reaches "interference" with rights, even discouraging a worker from asking can be a violation. If a retaliation complaint surfaces, do not react from the hip — investigate it properly. See Conducting a Workplace Investigation: A Practical Checklist. And because pregnancy accommodation sits alongside other protected-status and employment-law obligations, calibrate your practices against parallel regimes such as those covered in Age Discrimination Law: A Worker's and Employer's Overview and, where post-employment restrictions are in play, The Future of Non-Competes: FTC Rulemaking and the State-Law Patchwork.

Common mistakes to avoid

Treating the PWFA like the ADA. The "known limitation" standard is broader than "disability," and a normal, uncomplicated pregnancy is covered. Do not apply the ADA's disability screen to a PWFA request.
Demanding a doctor's note for everything. For the four predictable assessments, obvious limitations, and lactation needs, requiring documentation is itself unreasonable.
Forcing leave. Sending a pregnant worker home when an on-the-job accommodation exists is the paradigm PWFA violation, not a way to comply.
Skipping the interactive process. A yes or no delivered without dialogue undermines your defense even when the outcome is right.
Sitting on the request. Unreasonable delay is its own violation; time-sensitive pregnancy needs can't wait for a monthly HR committee.
Using a bathroom as the pump space. A bathroom never satisfies the PUMP Act, no matter how private or clean.
Letting pump breaks become working time. If the employee isn't fully relieved of duty, the break must be paid.
Assuming the small-employer PUMP exemption applies automatically. It requires an actual, individualized undue-hardship showing.
Invoking undue hardship without analysis. It is "significant difficulty or expense" measured against the employer's full resources — not a manager's convenience or precedent anxiety.
Leaving the handbook stale. A policy that predates June 2023 almost certainly misstates the law.

Consolidated one-glance checklist

Coverage and framing

[ ] PWFA employer (15+)? PUMP/FLSA employer? Worker is an employee, not a contractor?
[ ] Request concerns a "known limitation" related to pregnancy, childbirth, or a related condition (broadly read, including lactation, miscarriage, IVF)?
[ ] Identify the most protective statute in the stack (PWFA, PDA/Title VII, ADA, FMLA, PUMP) and comply with it.

Interactive process and accommodation

[ ] Engage promptly and in good faith; individualized dialogue.
[ ] Grant the four predictable assessments on the spot — no documentation (water; restroom breaks; sit/stand; eat/drink breaks).
[ ] Consider temporary suspension of an essential function where the worker can resume it in the near future.
[ ] Request documentation only where reasonable and minimal.

Limits

[ ] No unnecessary delay. No denial based on the need for accommodation.
[ ] No forced leave when an on-the-job accommodation works.
[ ] Undue hardship only after analysis, documented, judged against full resources.

Lactation (PUMP Act)

[ ] Reasonable break time, each time needed, up to one year.
[ ] Private, functional, non-bathroom space, shielded and free from intrusion.
[ ] Pay rule handled (unpaid only if fully relieved of duty; exempt employees covered).

Notice, policy, records

[ ] Posters current; handbook policy updated; supervisors trained to escalate.
[ ] Written interactive-process record kept; medical info confidential and separate.
[ ] No retaliation, coercion, or interference; investigate complaints properly.

Primary authority

Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000gg et seq. (effective June 27, 2023).
EEOC Final Rule to Implement the PWFA, 29 C.F.R. Part 1636 (effective June 18, 2024) (defining "known limitation," the interactive process, the four predictable assessments, temporary suspension of essential functions, documentation limits, and undue hardship).
PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act, 29 U.S.C. § 218d (break time and private, non-bathroom space to express breast milk for up to one year; coverage of exempt employees; enforcement).
Pregnancy Discrimination Act; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(k) (discrimination "because of or on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions" is sex discrimination).
Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12112 (disability accommodation, including pregnancy-related conditions that qualify as disabilities; confidentiality of medical information).
Family and Medical Leave Act, 29 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq. (job-protected leave for the birth and care of a child).
Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 575 U.S. 206 (2015) (pre-PWFA comparator framework for pregnancy light-duty claims under the PDA).

Related UpLaw resources

Related Guides & Articles

Related Checklists

Related Toolkits

This checklist is general legal information from UpLaw (uplaw.us), not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Statutes, rules, and fees change; verify current requirements and consult qualified counsel before acting.