Call Center Fired Temporary Employees Because They Were Pregnant

Blog# 05042020EEOC


Join me as I read the 5/4/20 Phoenix District EEOC office news bulletin regarding a call center sued by the EEOC for allegedly firing temporary employees who were pregnant along with the staffing agency who placed them that also failed to take corrective action after learning of the reason for discharge.

Logisticare Solutions and HCM Staffing allegedly fired temporary employees placed by a staffing company because they were pregnant according to a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The EEOC also charged that the staffing company, Human Capital Management, Inc., doing business as HCM Staffing, violated federal law when it did not take appropriate corrective action after it learned that LogistiCare terminated its employees because of their pregnancies.

Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, which prohibits employment discrimination based on sex, including pregnancy. The EEOC filed suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona (EEOC v. LogistiCare Solutions, LLC and Human Capital Management, Inc. dba HCM Staffing, Civil Action No. 2:20-cv-00852-GMS) after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process. The lawsuit seeks back pay, compensa­tory damages, and punitive damages for the charging party and other aggrieved individuals as well as appropriate injunctive relief to prevent discriminatory practices in the future.  

PDA Notes

Covered employer is defined as an employer with 15 or more employees

Time Limits

  • Non-federal employee have 180 days to file a charge (this may be increased based on individual state law)
  • Federal employees have 45 days to contact an EEO counselor

1604.10 Employment policies relating to pregnancy and childbirth.

§ 1604.10 Employment policies relating to pregnancy and childbirth.

  • (a) A written or unwritten employment policy or practice which excludes from employment applicants or employees because of pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions is in prima facie violation of title VII.
  • (b) Disabilities caused or contributed to by pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, for all job-related purposes, shall be treated the same as disabilities caused or contributed to by other medical conditions, under any health or disability insurance or sick leave plan available in connection with employment. Written or unwritten employment policies and practices involving matters such as the commencement and duration of leave, the availability of extensions, the accrual of seniority and other benefits and privileges, reinstatement, and payment under any health or disability insurance or sick leave plan, formal or informal, shall be applied to disability due to pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions on the same terms and conditions as they are applied to other disabilities. Health insurance benefits for abortion, except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or where medical complications have arisen from an abortion, are not required to be paid by an employer; nothing herein, however, precludes an employer from providing abortion benefits or otherwise affects bargaining agreements in regard to abortion.
  • (c) Where the termination of an employee who is temporarily disabled is caused by an employment policy under which insufficient or no leave is available, such a termination violates the Act if it has a disparate impact on employees of one sex and is not justified by business necessity.
  • (d)(1) Any fringe benefit program, or fund, or insurance program which is in effect on October 31, 1978, which does not treat women affected by pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions the same as other persons not so affected but similar in their ability or inability to work, must be in compliance with the provisions of § 1604.10(b) by April 29, 1979. In order to come into compliance with the provisions of 1604.10(b), there can be no reduction of benefits or compensation which were in effect on October 31, 1978, before October 31, 1979 or the expiration of a collective bargaining agreement in effect on October 31, 1978, whichever is later.
  • (2) Any fringe benefit program implemented after October 31, 1978, must comply with the provisions of § 1604.10(b) upon implementation.[44 FR 23805, Apr. 20, 1979]


EEOC Phoenix District Office 5/4/20 news bulletin

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s