Guo Yujie

The University of New South Wales

Abstract：

Globally, employment discrimination on the grounds of pregnancy and family responsibilities has been widely regarded as a key obstacle to gender equality and decent work. A study comparing maternity leave, parental leave and anti-discrimination systems shows that although most countries legally recognise the social value of childbirth and care, there is still a clear gap in the level of treatment, coverage and implementation, and the effectiveness of the system also depends highly on the specific welfare system and the tradition of labour law. Against this background, the United States and China provide two contrasting regulatory paths. Relying on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act and state-level pregnancy accommodation laws, the United States has developed a rights-based framework centred on anti-discrimination litigation, with employer obligations and remedies refined through enforcement guidance and case law. By contrast, China embeds equal employment and maternity protection in labour legislation and administrative supervision, mainly through the Employment Promotion Law, the Law on the Protection of Women's Rights and Interests, the Special Provisions on the Labour Protection of Female Employees and Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security regulations on recruitment, but still faces gaps in the burden of proof, justiciability and dedicated anti-discrimination mechanisms. Accordingly, the core question to be answered in this article is: how do China and the United States regulate discrimination related to pregnancy and family responsibilities in the field of employment, and what inspiration can both sides get from each other's experience? This article will argue that the American model is relatively mature in terms of individual remedies and formal equality, but it has a limited response to the structural issue of care responsibility; the Chinese model more directly recognises the importance of fertility and care, but lacks strong and justiciable anti-discrimination tools.

Key Words：

pregnancy and family responsibilities discrimination; employment discrimination; legal protection framework; China; the United States; comparative study