I don't understand, if pregnant women and sick employees are given paid leave for weeks-months, then how is it fair that those who are not pregnant and not sick be laid off earlier than them? How's it equity if we're not willing to get both ends of the same deal? If we say that's because they can't work immediately like the others, first of all there's no guarantee that they'll get work immediately either. Secondly, we're working for a company and not an NGO so can't expect them to do that.
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/17/google-nixes-paying-out-rest-of-medical-leave-for-laid-off-employees.html
When I wrnt through a company merger, I was pregnant and worried about being laid off. Everyone around me said I would be the safest employee because no one would fire a pregnant woman to avoid discrimination for being pregnant. I never had that mindset because they could have eliminated my entire department, and it would have been equal because I would have been included with others. Luckily we all kept our jobs, but I say all that to say some are looking for any reason for wrongful termination so as my co-workers said the FMLA employees are in the safest position all to avoid the company being sued.