London Daily

Focus on the big picture.
Sunday, Sep 20, 2026

How abortion became a US workplace issue

How abortion became a US workplace issue

Abortion has traditionally been a private matter. But now some US companies are rolling out support for workers who want it.

Traditionally, abortion has been a personal issue, separate from a person’s work life. People who want abortions generally make their own arrangements privately, whether that’s obtaining medication, finding a clinic or funding a procedure if it is not covered by insurance or the government.

Increasingly, however, some workplaces in the US – where healthcare is typically linked to employment – have stepped in to lessen the burden on employees. This trend has mostly emerged in the last couple years, as restrictions on abortion began increasing in individual states.

Now, it has taken on much greater prominence, since the Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to abortion enshrined in a legal ruling known as Roe v Wade on 24 June. The decision means many abortion providers have stopped operating in states with trigger laws (laws that automatically banned abortion with the end of Roe v Wade).

Although many companies have remained quiet on the subject, some firms have confirmed they will provide support to workers who want abortions. This often includes emotional support such as counselling; financial support, such as paid medical leave and out-of-state travel expenses; and legal support in case it is necessary, including coverage of legal expenses. Mostly, only certain kinds of companies are speaking out and enacting policies; many more appear to be opting for caution, in part due to perceived repercussions or potential logistical hurdles.

While more firms may formulate policies in coming months, it’s already clear that the conversations and actions around reproductive health in the workplace will be a very contentious area for companies and employees alike.

Some companies have chosen to extend their healthcare coverage to include abortion support, though the move is hardly universal


Companies funding travel and care


The movement to restrict abortion access has been particularly active in conservative US states, especially since the September 2021 rollout of a ban in Texas on most abortions after six weeks. Inspired by the Texas law, in May 2022, Oklahoma legislators passed a law banning almost all abortions, from the point of conception.

After each major restriction, pushback from pro-choice activists has been fierce. Companies have also become involved in the discourse, in small though growing numbers. Especially in the past year, some employers have announced the addition of employee benefits supporting abortion access; since the Supreme Court decision on Roe v Wade, more firms have also announced similar programmes.

For companies looking to offer these resources, “the most common and logistically sustainable way of supporting employees is to create a reimbursement benefit for any reproductive care service not currently covered by health insurance coverage”, says Lauren Winans, CEO of the US HR consultancy Next Level Benefits. “Most companies offering this benefit today are potentially reimbursing eligible employees up to $10,000 for care and travel.”

This travel, generally out-of-state, might be to obtain a surgical abortion or a prescription for self-managed abortion. (Self-managed abortion, involving medication, is the most common form of abortion in the US.) Amazon, Levi Strauss & Co and Citigroup have all committed to covering travel expenses for employees who can’t access abortions locally. Policies at yoghurt-maker Chobani, Power Home Remodeling and Amalgamated Bank include covering childcare expenses, which would help the many working parents who want abortions.

Rhia Ventures, a venture-capital fund focused on reproductive and maternal health, maintains a database of companies’ commitments and expressions of support on reproductive healthcare. It lists fewer than 100 companies that have publicly responded to mounting abortion restrictions – and not all of these have gone so far as to integrate abortion-specific benefits.

Laura Gitman, chief operating officer of sustainability consultancy BSR, has observed that women lead a number of the companies particularly active and vocal in offering abortion benefits. Companies headquartered in the coastal US, which tends to lean politically liberal, are also overrepresented, as are major tech firms. At some of these companies, the decision to expand reproductive health policies will have come from the top.

One August 2021 survey of 1,804 US adults showed 73% of respondents wanted their employers’ health insurance to include abortion


This is the case for Alloy, a New York-based identity-verification company, which introduced expanded reproductive health policies in January 2022. These policies cover legal expenses related to anti-abortion laws (up to $5,000), out-of-state travel expenses (up to $1,500) and out-of-pocket medical costs (up to $1,500) for employees or their partners. These benefits have not changed following the demise of Roe v Wade.

Kim Nguyen, Alloy’s head of people, says the company’s co-founder highlighted a support gap for employees in their ability to access care. The company has about 200 staff members, with several living in states where abortion restrictions would directly impact them. Fifty percent of the staff are women, and 3% are non-binary or gender-fluid. No employee has yet made use of the abortion support, which is confidential, but Nguyen chalks this up to timing and the company’s moderate size.

Data shows policies like these can be important to employees. One August 2021 survey of 1,804 US adults from non-partisan research firm Perry Undem showed 73% of respondents wanted their employers’ health insurance to include abortion, and 69% believed that reproductive healthcare should be part of companies’ efforts to address gender equity. Younger workers and women were particularly likely to want abortion-related benefits from their employers; even if they’re unlikely to use such benefits themselves, these are signals of a company’s values, something many workers look for when choosing – or staying with – a potential employer.

Risk versus reward


On the whole, however, most businesses have opted to remain silent. While plenty of companies, especially within tech, have responded with statements and new benefits policies, many prominent companies and business associations have chosen not to comment since a leaked draft opinion in May 2022 foreshadowed the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v Wade.

Not every firm will choose to offer abortion support for employees due to potential legal and organisational issues or ideological stances


The hesitation owes partly to the uncertainties involved with delivering abortion-related benefits and partly to political reasons. For a start, American healthcare is already incredibly complex. For those companies interested in offering support, abortion-related policies affecting dispersed workforces, when abortion and abortion support are illegal in some states, could bring logistical and legal challenges. Bethany Corbin, senior counsel at Virginia-based Nixon Gwilt Law, anticipates companies operating across the country will group states into categories based on the restrictiveness of their abortion laws, and provide different benefits packages accordingly.

Adjusting policies is likely to be easier for larger companies; small companies generally have less flexibility on benefits. David Joffe, an expert on employee benefits at national law firm Bradley, says small employers tend to have fewer options to customise group health plans, and may lack resources to expand existing offerings. Plus, there may be geographic complications. “Insurers in some states may now be unable or unwilling to issue policies in those states that cover abortions,” he says.

Companies might also face ramifications if they roll out abortion assistance. For instance, Ron Zambrano, the employment litigation chair at Los Angeles-based West Coast Trial Lawyers, comments, “Elected officials in red [conservative] states might want to punish companies that help employees in those states obtain abortions, by forcing public agencies to withdraw business from those companies.”

These potential complications may also contribute to why some companies have made less explicit moves to support employee abortion access, such as covering abortion-related expenses without specifically mentioning abortion. One HR leader believes that companies that offer such benefits are more likely to do so quietly and non-publicly.

As reported by the newsletter Popular Information, a major PR firm advised its corporate clients immediately following the Supreme Court leak, “This topic is a textbook ‘50/50’ issue. Subjects that divide the country can sometimes be no-win situations for companies…”.

That perception of divisiveness is pervasive, though some experts, including Gitman, believe the reality is different. She says many polls show the majority of Americans support reasonable access to abortion care as part of reproductive health needs. “I think that’s why there’s actually less risk to companies than many might think there is. They’re not really at risk of alienating a large percentage of their consumers or employees,” she believes.

Elected officials in red [conservative] states might want to punish companies that help employees in those states obtain abortions – Ron Zambrano


Still, public response to corporate abortion benefits has varied – in part depending on a company’s industry, their track record of political activism and the political views of their consumer-base. On one hand, some people have reported signing up for or investing in dating app Bumble after it announced that it was creating a relief fund for people seeking abortions in Texas. Similarly, after food company Chobani announced it was extending its health coverage of abortion access, some customers expressed appreciation and loyalty. In contrast, shareholders of financial-institution Citi have questioned whether the company’s abortion travel policy is a reasonable use of funds.

‘Unknown land’


Yet workplace abortion benefits are not a complete solution. Gitman notes many people would feel more comfortable going to a community organisation for support rather than their employer. Corbin worries about information security; she advises companies rolling out abortion benefits to make sure they’re aware of the relevant laws, and revisit data privacy and security standards to ensure that they have best practices in place.

Plus, abortion-related benefits may primarily benefit employees who are already relatively advantaged. In the US, unplanned births are more likely for women who are precariously employed or on low incomes. Some of the newly announced policies don’t apply to hourly workers, or to those who don’t already receive employee benefits, which are often reserved for full-time employees. And of course, abortion-specific policies apply only to a small number of companies thus far (and generally exclude the self-employed).

Overall, much remains to be seen regarding the rollout and take-up of such benefits, especially in an evolving legal landscape. “So far, we’re in an unknown land,” says Gitman.

Newsletter

Related Articles

0:00
0:00
Close
Addison Lee Founder Loses £20 Million UK Tax Tribunal Case
BrewDog Creditors Face Losses on About £190 Million of Debt
Harrods Seeks to Recover Abuse Compensation Costs From Mohamed Al Fayed’s Estate
Ed Davey Targets Reform UK as Liberal Democrat Conference Opens
Great Britain Retail Sales Rise 0.5% in August
NHS England Approves Life-Extending Treatment for Incurable Breast Cancer
Proposals to Limit NHS ADHD Diagnoses Draw Criticism From Patient Groups
Resolution Foundation Warns of Housing Cost Crunch for Low-Income UK Families
BBC Cash Reserves Fall to Decade Low as Annual Deficit Reaches £121 Million
Millisecond Software Error Triggered Major UK Air Traffic Control Disruption
Twenty Women Underwent Unnecessary Mastectomies During NHS Cancer Care
Sensitive UK Police Data Found Vulnerable to Access by Foreign Actors
British Steel Faces Renewed Pressure for a Long-Term Financial Plan
MPs Urge Government to End Thames Water Restructuring Talks With U.S. Hedge Funds
Andy Burnham Warns of Difficult UK Budget Choices as Inflation Returns to 3.1%
England Tightens School Food Standards With Restrictions on Deep-Fried and High-Sugar Foods
Oxfordshire Village Votes Symbolically to Leave UK Over Proposed Asylum Centre
Michael Marra Elected Leader of Scottish Labour
BBC Cash Reserves Fall Sharply as Financial Pressures Mount
George Osborne Calls for UK to Rejoin EU Customs Union
UK Explores Joining Canada-Led Global Defence Bank
Thirlwall Inquiry Highlights Management Failures Surrounding Lucy Letby Crimes
Parliamentary Committee Calls for New UK Law to Address AI Risks to Human Rights
UK Considers Giving Regional Mayors Greater Oversight of Water Companies
UK Opposition Presses Burnham for Stronger Response to Russian Security Threats
Reform UK Faces Scrutiny Over £72 Million in Donations as Political Finance Rules Tighten
Millisecond Software Failure Behind UK Air-Traffic Outage That Cancelled More Than 2,000 Flights
Bank of England Holds Interest Rate at 3.75% as Energy Prices Complicate Inflation Outlook
Burnham Warns of Difficult Choices in October Budget as UK Inflation Rises to 3.1%
Addison Lee Founder Loses £20.5 Million Non-Domicile Tax Case
BrewDog Creditors Face Heavy Losses After Collapse
Thirteenth Metropolitan Police Officer Dismissed Over Charing Cross Conduct
Oxfordshire Village Votes Symbolically to Leave UK Over Asylum Accommodation Plan
NHS Approves Life-Extending Treatment for Women With Incurable Breast Cancer
Software Defect Blamed for Major UK Air Traffic Disruption
Twenty Women Underwent Unnecessary Mastectomies at County Durham NHS Trust
British Steel Costs Taxpayers £1.3 Million a Day as MPs Demand Long-Term Plan
UK Parliament Advances Sovereign Grant Reform Setting Royal Funding at £99.9 Million
King Charles Urges Human-Centred Approach to Artificial Intelligence at Scotland Summit
House of Lords Begins Scrutiny of Voting-Age and Political Finance Reforms
UK Labour Market Shows Growing Divide Between Younger and Older Workers
Nearly Seven in 10 UK Small Businesses Delay or Cancel Growth Plans as Costs Rise
Andy Burnham Reaffirms UK Net-Zero Target Amid North Sea Energy Debate
UK Parliament Demands Credible Financial and Decarbonisation Plan for British Steel
MPs Urge Government to Reject Thames Water Rescue Deal and Prepare Special Administration
Bank of England Holds Rate at 3.75% as Energy Shock Raises Inflation Risks
TUC Calls for Social Energy Tariff Funded by Higher Taxes on Bank Profits
UK Parliament Enters Conference Recess After Advancing Sovereign Grant Legislation
King Charles Hosts Artificial Intelligence Leaders at Dumfries House Summit
Nearly Seven in Ten UK Small Businesses Delay or Cancel Growth Plans as Costs Rise
×