***checks notes*** unlawful
In a press release issued on Monday, the EEOC claims that an employer violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which makes it unlawful to discriminate based on pregnancy, when it failed to hire an applicant as a hair braider because she was pregnant. They supposedly refused to hire her because, wait for it, they already had a pregnant employee.
According to the suit, a pregnant woman applied for a hair braider position and performed a skills test with satisfactory results, but then the company’s owner found out that she was pregnant.
“Some company don’t hire people who are advanced in pregnancy,” the owner allegedly texted the woman.
“We hired you when you were not pregnant but you did not take the job now we are sorry for your situation. You condition now we will not be able to deal with it. Good luck,” the EEOC claims he added.
And just so there was no misunderstanding, the company owner allegedly followed up with another text: “Sorry lady, we are dealing with a pregnant instructor now and it’s too much uncomfortable situation, it’s not in our best interest to have two pregnant ladies in our school now.”
In case you were wondering, Title VII does not allow employers to cap the number of pregnant workers they hire.
Sure, these are just allegations in a complaint and not evidence presented to a jury, but if the EEOC has the receipts, then I suspect that the EEOC won’t have to introduce these text messages as evidence to the jury. Instead, we’ll see another EEOC press release in the not-too-distant future announcing a settlement of this lawsuit.