The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is cracking down on companies that fail to enforce the newly passed Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA). In two newly filed lawsuits, the EEOC is going after an Alabama-based car maker and an Oklahoma-based medical specialty provider for violations of the new law along with violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The first lawsuit was filed against Huntsville, Alabama, automaker, Polaris. The automaker manufactures motorcycles, off-road vehicles, snowmobiles, and boats at its Huntsville plant. The pregnant worker at the center of the lawsuit worked on the factory floor, installing floor panels on electric vehicles. During her orientation joining the company, she disclosed to her employers that she was pregnant.
During her time working, she developed pregnancy-related health issues including gestational diabetes, swelling in her feet and nausea. As a result of her health ailments, she had to take days off to regain her health.
The lawsuit explains that despite her health condition and a restriction from her physician to keep from working over 40 hours a week, the company forced her to continue working mandatory overtime. Additionally, the woman was reprimanded, incurring points against her because she took sick days due to her health issues that arose from her pregnancy. The woman says she was threatened with termination if she had two unexcused absences and was denied requests for medically necessary appointments as they related to her pregnancy.
According to the EEOC, the company failed to provide adequate accommodations as detailed under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Under these laws, individuals including pregnant women are afforded certain protections and reasonable accommodations while at work. These laws detail that a company cannot discriminate against women simply because they are pregnant. The PWFA went into effect last year.
According to the lawsuit, Polaris’ operation policy only allowed excused absences for military or jury duty, bereavement, inclement weather or to give subpoenaed witness testimony.
In filing the lawsuit, Karla Gilbride, general counsel for the EEOC, shared in a statement, “No pregnant worker should have to choose between their health and earning a living to support their family.”
Polaris responded to the lawsuit explaining, “Polaris is committed to providing a fair and inclusive workplace for all our employees and we take seriously our compliance with all applicable employment laws, including the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.”
Polaris is not the only company to face a lawsuit against the EEOC for violating the newly passed Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. Another company, specialty medical provider Urologic Specialists of Oklahoma, Inc., is also accused of not protecting the rights of pregnant employees. In a similar case, the company is accused of preventing a medical assistant in the company's Tulsa facility from sitting, taking breaks, or working part-time as was required by her physician. The woman was deemed to have a high-risk pregnancy, but instead of accommodating their employee, the company forced her to take unpaid leave. She was also refused a guarantee that she would be given breaks to express breastmilk. The woman refused to return to work until her requests regarding her pregnancy were honored. As a result, the Tulsa facility terminated her employment.
Andrea G. Baran, regional attorney for the EEOC’s St. Louis District, shared in a statement, “A pregnant employee does not have to risk her health and safety just to keep her job,” adding, “Federal law requires employers to reasonably accommodate pregnant employees absent an undue hardship. The EEOC will continue to vigorously protect expectant and new mothers in the workplace.”
