Stand up for facts and support PolitiFact.

Now is your chance to go on the record as supporting trusted, factual information by joining PolitiFact’s Truth Squad. Contributions or gifts to PolitiFact, which is part of the 501(c)(3) nonprofit Poynter Institute, are tax deductible.

More Info

I would like to contribute

Emma Diltz
By Emma Diltz September 27, 2017
Carolina Vargas
By Carolina Vargas September 27, 2017

Column on Feministing website about abortion law is Pants on Fire

An Internet claim that Missouri employers will gain the right to fire people who use birth control when a state bill becomes law is incorrect.

"Missouri Votes to Let Employers Fire People Who Use Birth Control," reads a headline from Feministing.

"A new Missouri bill would target abortion providers and sanction employment and housing discrimination against people who use birth control or have an abortion," writes Sejal Singh, Feministing columnist, in the article.

A St. Louis ordinance passed in February prohibits discrimination because of reproductive health care decisions. But Missouri Senate Bill 5, or SB 5, which was signed by the governor in July, will overturn that local ordinance when it takes effect in October.

Since SB 5 was signed, we’ve seen claims that the bill would allow for employers to fire workers for using birth control. But we found no evidence that that’s true.

Where is this coming from?

Singh told PolitiFact Missouri she based her commentary on the analysis of news articles.

AllureRefinery29, and Newsweek were just a few among media sources that reported the bill would allow for employees to fire people for using birth control. Newsweek came out with an updated article stating that it, among other publications, had erroneously reported on the bill.

Many of these news organizations referenced NARAL Pro-Choice Missouri, which ran an ad online and on the radio that read, "Do you think your boss should be able to fire you for using birth control?"

This ad only ran for one week, but its interpretation of the bill was influential to many of those articles.

According to Alison Dreith, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Missouri, it was the rhetoric of Republicans and not the actual language that led to this interpretation.

Featured Fact-check

"It still remains to be seen if SB 5 will pre-empt the St. Louis ordinance," Dreith said in an email interview.

What’s in SB 5?

The bill, signed by the governor in late July, touches on a lot of provisions, such as tissue report modifications, local abortion policies, employee disclosure policies and abortion facility inspections.

Under the political subdivision authority part of the bill, it allows property owners to refuse to rent or sell to a person who plans to use the facility as an abortion clinic that isn’t for the sole purpose of saving the mother’s life.

Within the same guidelines, it also doesn’t require healthcare providers or employers to provide coverage "that includes benefits that are not otherwise required by state law."

Employers in Missouri are already allowed to deny contraceptive coverage in their employee’s health insurance plans.

Daniel Wilhelm, with Republican Rep. Andrew Koenig’s office, said the bill does not reference birth control or contraceptives, except under circumstances where employers can refuse health care if they don’t want to pay for birth control.

Elizabeth Sepper, a professor of law at Washington University, said in an email that no matter what Missouri does, federal law bars an employer with 15 or more employees from discriminating against employees based on their reproductive choices, such as taking contraception.

Even with the passing of the bill, Sepper said St. Louis’ city ordinance still prevents employers from firing employees who use birth control, and SB 5 doesn’t affect that protection.

Our ruling

A columnist for Feministing claimed that SB 5 will allow employers to fire their workers for using birth control.

While the bill will impose higher level of restrictions on abortion providers and allow real estate agents to refuse to sell or rent them land, the bill does not say employers can fire workers for using contraceptives.

We rate this claim Pants on Fire.

 

Our Sources

Twitter, Sejal Singh, Feministing columnist, Sept. 11, 2017

Email, Alison Dreith, Executive Director of NARAL Pro-Choice Missouri, Sept. 12, 2017

Email, Lauren Holter, Refinery29 writer, Sept. 14, 2017

Email, Elizabeth Sepper, law professor at Washington University, Sept. 20, 2017

Interview with Daniel Wilhelm, spokesman for Sen. Koenig, Sept. 12, 2017

Allure, "Using Birth Control or Getting an Abortion Could Disqualify You From Jobs in Missouri," June 17, 2017

AP, "St. Louis Ordinance Seeks to Pre-empt Missouri Abortion Laws," Feb. 23, 2017

Equal Opportunity Employment Commission, "ENFORCEMENT GUIDANCE: PREGNANCY DISCRIMINATION AND RELATED ISSUES," Sept. 20, 2017.

The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation,"State Requirements for Insurance Coverage of Contraceptives," Aug. 31, 2017

Justia, "2012 Missouri Revised Statutes TITLE XII PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE," 2017

Kansas City Star, "Missouri Senate passes new restrictions on abortion in late-night vote," June 15, 2017

Planned Parenthood, "Playing Politics with Missourians’ Reproductive Health: Medically Unnecessary Abortion Restrictions & Rolling Back Nondiscrimination Protections"

Pro Choice Missouri, "NARAL Unveils New Radio, Online Ads Calling Out Gov Greitens, GOP For Wasteful Emergency Session," June 15, 2017

Refinery29, "Can Employers Discriminate For Pregnancy Or Birth Control Use? Missouri Lawmakers Think So," June 16, 2017

Column on Feministing website about abortion law is Pants on Fire

Support independent fact-checking.
Become a member!

In a world of wild talk and fake news, help us stand up for the facts.

Sign me up