As the EEOC brings its first enforcement actions under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, Rebecca Lianos of AbsenceSoft examines five groundbreaking cases that reveal common compliance pitfalls and essential lessons for employers navigating the new law.
Since the early 1990s, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) have served as cornerstones of worker protections. In 2023, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) broke new ground, introducing the first significant expansion of workers’ rights in decades.
The PWFA specifically introduced stronger protections for pregnant workers, and the EEOC has made it clear that it will seek financial and compensatory damages, along with other penalties, for violations. Since accepting charges under the PWFA on June 27, 2023, the EEOC has filed four lawsuits against employers and announced a settlement with a fifth as of this past November.
The EEOC’s swift action serves as a wake-up call for companies to act quickly and align with the PWFA.
Recent legal action
Here is a quick summary of the five cases brought forward by the EEOC due to PWFA violations:
EEOC v. Wabash National Corp. (September 2024): This was the first federal lawsuit focused on a PWFA violation, centering on a denial of a pregnant employee’s request to transfer to a role that didn’t require her to lie on her stomach. It alleges that the company 1) provides similar accommodations to non-pregnant workers with similar limitations and 2) unlawfully required medical documentation.
EEOC v. Polaris Industries (September 2024): According to the EEOC, the manufacturing company failed to excuse an employee’s absence for pregnancy-related medical conditions and appointments. Additionally, the company required her to work mandatory overtime despite knowing her physician restricted her to a maximum of 40 hours per week during her pregnancy.
EEOC v. Urologic Specialists of Oklahoma (September 2024): A specialty medical practice was accused of denying a pregnant medical assistant accommodations recommended by her physician, including the ability to sit, take breaks or work part-time during the final trimester of her high-risk pregnancy. Instead, the practice forced her to take unpaid leave and refused to guarantee her breaks to express breastmilk. The employee’s employment was terminated when she didn’t return to work without assurances for those breaks.
EEOC v. ABC Pest Control (September 2024): This case was the first public settlement under the PWFA. An employee alleged that ABC Pest Control fired her after she requested an accommodation to attend monthly medical appointments related to her pregnancy. In the settlement, ABC Pest Control agreed to pay $47,480 in damages, as well as committed to appointing an equal employment opportunity coordinator, updating its employment policies to include provisions for reasonable accommodations under the PWFA, providing training for both management and non-management staff and submitting quarterly reports on accommodation requests and discrimination complaints.
EEOC v. Kurt Bluemel (October 2024): Kurt Bluemel, a Baltimore County commercial nursery, was accused of telling a pregnant worker that there was no work available when returning from maternity leave. However, the employer hired new, non-pregnant employees during and after the worker’s attempted return.
Long Covid & Invisible Disabilities: Revisiting ADA Compliance for 2024
Modern workplaces need modern solutions
Read moreDetailsLessons learned and a path forward
While the violations in the above cases are relatively straightforward, they serve as an important reminder that businesses must have the right processes in place to avoid the costly pitfalls that have already led to legal consequences.
Everyone — from line managers to leadership — must ensure compliance to avoid exposing the company to risk.
Key areas of focus include:
Policy and process review
Evaluate current policies that deal with pregnancy-related leave and accommodation requests. It’s also important to pay attention to pregnancy-related leave and accommodations benefits provided to other temporarily disabled employees to make sure there is parity. Also, the PWFA requires swiftness in an employer’s response time, so employers should review their processes determining where unnecessary steps may lag in making decisions for PWFA.
Manager training
It’s not just HR and senior leadership who need to understand the PWFA — all people managers must also be fully informed. The EEOC emphasized in its final rule that employees should be able to seek accommodations from the person they typically go to with work-related matters. This makes comprehensive manager training a priority. There have been many PWFA- and non-PWFA-related incidents where line managers were simply unaware of what was required by law when making an accommodation determination. This training should be done regularly to reduce the risk of noncompliance.
Certain requests may automatically be approved as PWFA accommodations without documentation, such as allowing more frequent bathroom breaks or access to water bottles. Managers may need to be informed of these items and not indicate to the employee they are against policy standards or automatic “no” based on an operating procedure or other standards without a review from HR. It is also crucial to train managers that when an employee notifies them of pregnancy, it doesn’t automatically mean the employee needs accommodations.
Engage in the interactive process
Going through the interactive process for every accommodation request to determine what is reasonable and ensure thorough documentation of all discussions and decisions is paramount.
At its core, the interactive process is a series of conversations to discuss, explore, implement and monitor workplace accommodations. These discussions address nuances and complexities that technology alone cannot resolve, ensuring fairness and equity in how accommodations are handled.
The interactive process and the ability to access past documentation are crucial for maintaining fairness when providing accommodations — a core aspect of the PWFA and a central issue in the EEOC’s case against Wabash National Corp. Organizations must avoid giving preferential treatment to any employee — whether intentionally or unintentionally — to ensure compliance with the law and foster a culture of workplace equity.
Know when documentation is required — and when it’s not
Employers must have a clear understanding of the documentation requirements under the PWFA and ADA. Both laws state that documentation should not be requested when an employee’s disability and need for accommodation are apparent. Additionally, the PWFA specifies documentation is not required when the:
- Employer already has sufficient information to support a pregnancy-related limitation.
- Request is for a lactation accommodation.
- Accommodation is available without documentation for other employees seeking the same accommodation for non-PWFA reasons.
The contents of the documentation must also exclude requesting a diagnosis or details not relating to the request. Employers are prohibited from requiring their own specific form be returned under PWFA. It is important to review any documentation the employee presents during the process.
The PWFA intentionally includes gray areas to provide the flexibility needed to address the unique nature of each pregnancy. This adaptability ensures the law can be applied fairly, accommodating the diverse experiences and needs of pregnant workers.
Ultimately, if an accommodation is requested for any condition related to pregnancy — even indirectly — it’s essential to closely evaluate whether it falls under the PWFA. In most cases, it will.
It’s also important to remember that while pregnancy may last up to 40 weeks, the law does not restrict the timeframe for pregnancy- or childbirth-related limitations. Accommodation requests must be evaluated individually, with a focus on the employee’s essential job functions and the specifics of their condition. The duration of an accommodation will vary based on the unique circumstances of each case.
Staying informed and proactive is crucial
The PWFA represents a significant shift in workplace protections, particularly in addressing pregnancy-related accommodations. By filling the gaps left by previous laws, it ensures that pregnancy-related conditions are treated the same as other temporary medical conditions.
To remain compliant and foster a supportive workplace, organizations must understand the PWFA’s requirements, stay informed about recent EEOC cases and update their policies and training accordingly. This proactive approach not only ensures legal compliance but also enhances employee retention and fosters a positive work environment.
Rebecca Lianos is a compliance analyst at AbsenceSoft, a workplace leave and accommodation management platform. She previously served in HR and benefits specialist roles in companies like Cracker Barrel and Connections Academy.
