EEOC Sues Employer Under The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

Home
Knowledge
EEOC Sues Employer Under The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

EEOC Sues Employer Under The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

{EE5F593F-894B-4F9E-BABF-B4B3C1734D31}

November 8, 2024

The EEOC recently filed one of the first lawsuits asserting a violation of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) – the 2022 law that requires covered employers to provide qualified employees with a reasonable accommodation for known limitations relating to, affected by, or arising out of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, unless the accommodation will cause the employer an undue hardship. The EEOC issued a final regulation with extensive interpretive guidance regarding implementation of the PWFA on June 18, 2024.

The EEOC filed its lawsuit on September 30, 2024 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against Lago Mar Properties, Inc., the owner and operator of Lago Mar Beach Resort & Club, a hotel and beach resort in Fort Lauderdale. The complaint alleges that Lago Mar failed to provide a reasonable accommodation under the PWFA (captioned EEOC v. Lago Mar Properties, Inc., Case No. 24-cv-61812). According to the Complaint, Wilda Jean Louis, a former line cook, requested leave to recover from the physical, mental, and emotional effects of a stillbirth. Louis gave birth to a stillborn baby on July 2, 2023, leading to significant emotional trauma that impaired major life activities and her performance of basic functions. According to the EEOC, Louis notified her immediate supervisor within two days of her stillbirth that she was admitted to the hospital and, provided her employer with a doctor’s note on July 5, 2023 that stated she would need about six weeks to recover. The Complaint alleges that Lago Mar’s general manager terminated Louis’s employment via letter the following day.

The EEOC’s suit offers insight into one of the many ways employers are expected to accommodate qualified employees. In this case, the EEOC alleged that Louis was a qualified employee under the PWFA because she could perform the essential functions of the job with the accommodation of a six-week leave to recover from stillbirth. The EEOC’s interpretive guidance offers other examples of what it might consider reasonable accommodations, including several scenarios that the EEOC considers “presumptively reasonable.” For more details on the EEOC’s interpretive guidance, please visit The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act Final Regulation is Finally in Effect – What Employers Need to Know.

The Complaint against Lago Mar does not specify the reason stated for the termination decision, and Lago Mar agreed to enter a three-year consent decree with the EEOC settling the lawsuit. Lago Mar expressly denied the allegations and did not admit to any wrongdoing in the consent decree. Lago Mar, however, agreed to pay Louis $92,080.00 in compensatory non-wage damages and $7,920.00 in backpay damages. Lago Mar also agreed to injunctive relief barring it from terminating or harassing any employee on the basis of their pregnancy or disability, requiring it to provide reasonable accommodations to applicants’ and employees’ known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, and barring it from retaliating against any person for requesting a reasonable accommodation under the PWFA or ADA. The EEOC’s press release concerning the consent decree can be found here.

The consent decree also requires Lago Mar to retain a third party to serve as its EEO Coordinator, at its sole expense, for the duration of the consent decree. Lago Mar is then required to consult with legal counsel and the EEO Coordinator to review and revise its policies prohibiting discrimination based upon sex, disability, and pregnancy or related medical conditions, providing reasonable accommodations, and describing the interactive process to conform to all requirements of the ADA, the PWFA, and the consent decree. Lastly, Lago Mar is required to provide mandatory EEO trainings to its managerial and non-managerial employees and report to the EEOC on a six-month basis.

Takeaways for Employers Subject to the PWFA

This lawsuit shows the EEOC’s intention to strictly enforce the terms of the PWFA, and offers insight into what it may consider reasonable accommodations in future employment scenarios. The lawsuit also serves as a reminder of the scope of potential proceedings employers may face by way of the EEOC and its enforcement power. To ensure compliance with the PWFA, employers subject to the PWFA should familiarize themselves with the law, its relationship with other relevant laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (as amended by the ADAAA), and the EEOC’s interpretive guidance. Employers should review their current policies and ensure they are up-to-date and consistent with the PWFA and the interpretive guidance. Finally, employers should provide training for managerial and human resources employees responsible for processing accommodation requests.