U.S. Lawsuit Accuses Walmart of Bias Against Pregnant Employees

166

Walmart is again being accused of violating federal law by failing to accommodate workers’ pregnancy-related medical restrictions.

According to a lawsuit brought by the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Alyssa Gilliam and a class of pregnant employees at Walmart’s Distribution Center in Menomonie, Wis., were not allowed to take part in a company light duty program that is designed to accommodate other workers’ restrictions.
Man Our investigation shows that Walmart is a powerful light-duty utility that allows workers exposed to lifting restrictions, di said Julianne Bowman, the regional director of EEOC in Chicago, where the federal agency is conducting a prejudiced administrative investigation. Et However, Walmart deprived pregnant workers of the opportunity to participate in the light-duty program. It was pregnancy discrimination that violated federal law. “

Walmart spokesman Randy Hargrove called Walmart “a great place for women” and said the company plans to defend itself against the claims.

Hargrove said that Walmart had updated his accommodation policy for the last few years and that his policies bun always fully or exceeded state and federal law and that this includes the Act on Americans with Disabilities and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act Har.

The giant retailer faces two other recent litigation cases, one in New York and one in Illinois, claiming pregnancy discrimination. The Illinois case likewise accuses pregnant women of severely lifting, climbing stairs and refusing requests to limit other potentially dangerous tasks. The New York case targets Walmart’s absenteeism policy and claims that two former employees were fired for lost times due to medical problems related to pregnancy.

The alleged behavior was determined by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA), which prohibits pregnancy discrimination in the workplace.

After the first attempt, the EEOC v. Case (EEOC v. Walmart Stores East, LP, d / b / a Walmart Distribution Center # 6025, Civilian Action No. 3: 18-cv-783) To reach consensus with the process of reconciliation.
The EEOC is looking for complete relief, including reimbursement, compensatory and criminal damages, and non-monetary measures to remedy Walmart’s future practices.

Ina While Walmart has refused the same accommodation facilities for pregnant workers who are engaged in a light percentage of their non-pregnant workers, who can do their jobs or are similar to their inability to work, Walmart has acted against the law, ederek said Gregory Gochanour, the EEOC’s Chicago Regional Office.

According to Walmart’s Hargrove, Walmart, provides accommodation every day in our stores, clubs, distribution centers and offices Wal. Leri This case is not appropriate for class treatment and we deny the allegations, sınıf says insurance news.

Legal warning !
The information, comments and suggestions there are not covered by investment advice. It is based on the author's personal opinions. These views may not fit your financial situation and risk and return preferences. For this reason, based solely on this information, investment decisions may not have the appropriate consequences for your expectation. Our Site is not responsible for any direct or indirect damages incurred by the investors as a result of the use of the information on the Site, deficiencies in the sources, damages incurred by profit, moral damages, or damage to third parties.