The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has brought suit against DoodyCalls, a pet waste removal service, for discrimination following the termination of a pregnant employee. The company allegedly let the employee go with the reasoning that it was in the best interest of the employee and her unborn child. The EEOC contends that it is the decision of the pregnant mother, not of her employer, that should determine if the work arrangement should be discontinued to protect her health and that of her child.
Within a few weeks of beginning the job in Rockville, Maryland, the woman told her supervisors that she was pregnant. She continued to work as a pet waste removal technician, collecting and disposing of pet waste in commercial and residential settings. After a few weeks, she had complications that required emergency surgery to address cervical issues that threatened her pregnancy. According to the suit, after her doctor cleared her to return to work post-surgery, managers advised that they thought her high-risk pregnancy presented a liability for the company, at which point they terminated her employment, saying that she was welcome to return after giving birth.
Failure to Accommodate
The Commission’s lawsuit alleged that the decision by DoodyCalls management to terminate the pregnant worker’s employment was unnecessary and discriminatory. Upon returning to work after the cervical surgery, the employee attempted to assure her managers that she would abide by self-imposed precautionary procedures, such as avoiding lifting loads heavier than 20 pounds and keeping herself from overexertion by committing to taking a break of five to 10 minutes after being on her feet for more than six hours; a level of physical activity significantly exceeding what her usual workday required.
In representing the rights of the pregnant technician, the EEOC attempted to mediate between the pet waste removal company and the aggrieved employee. Those attempts failed to produce any agreement, so the Commission filed a civil action against DoodyCalls in U.S. District Court. The aforementioned conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as well as the Pregnancy Discrimination Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case against DoodyCalls, like many other cases of employment discrimination regarding pregnancy or disability, allows the EEOC to further the cause against workplace discrimination.
Delaware County Employment Discrimination Lawyers at Sidney L. Gold & Associates, P.C. Protect Employees’ Rights
If you suffered any form of discrimination in the workplace, the Delaware County employment discrimination lawyers at Sidney L. Gold & Associates, P.C. will represent your interests and protect your rights. Contact us online or call us at 215-569-1999 for a free consultation. Located in Philadelphia, we serve clients throughout Wilkes-Barre, Scranton, and northeast Philadelphia, as well as Bucks County, Chester County, Delaware County, and Montgomery County.