Dive Brief:
- An Austin, Texas, bar will pay $42,000 to settle claims brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleging that the business reduced an employee’s work hours after she became visibly pregnant and fired her after she was hospitalized with a virus, EEOC announced Tuesday.
- EEOC filed a complaint against Corner Bar in 2023. The agency claimed the plaintiff was removed from a profitable closing shift and was eventually told she was fired in part because Corner Bar believed she would be “too much of a liability.” EEOC alleged pregnancy discrimination, in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
- The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas approved a three-year consent decree between the two parties, under which Corner Bar agreed to adopt and implement a written anti-discrimination policy, train all employees and post a notice affirming its anti-discrimination obligations under federal laws. Per the terms of the agreement, Corner Bar denied any wrongdoing or legal violation.
Dive Insight:
In enforcement guidance on pregnancy discrimination, EEOC has said that adverse treatment of pregnant workers “often arises from stereotypes and assumptions” about those workers’ job capabilities and commitment. Examples cited by EEOC include those in which an employer assumes that a pregnant employee will have attendance issues or leave their job following childbirth.
The agency alleged that the plaintiff’s manager informed her that Corner Bar was “genuinely scared something bad [was] going to happen” to the plaintiff, specifically citing a fight that nearly broke out between bar patrons. EEOC further claimed that the manager then removed the plaintiff from the bar’s work schedule and replaced her with other employees for all future shifts.
“EEOC is pleased with the resolution of this case, which includes compensation for the former employee who was working to provide for her growing family,” Philip Moss, an EEOC trial attorney, said in an agency press release. “Unilaterally reducing an employee’s hours because of pregnancy is unlawful.”
Employers have faced numerous allegations regarding adverse employment decisions made on the basis of pregnancy in recent years. For example, food producer Perdue settled in January a worker’s claim that the company placed her on involuntary leave, even though she requested access to water and a bathroom so that she could return to work.
Similarly, EEOC sued an Arizona-based call center it alleged had fired at least two pregnant women a week into their training because the company assumed the workers would not be able to comply with its attendance policy. The employer in that case signed a consent decree with EEOC in 2021 that included a $120,000 settlement.
