Dollar General resolves pregnancy discrimination lawsuit.
OAN’s Stephanie Stahl
11:23 AM – Friday, October 13, 2023
Dollar General reportedly fired an employee in Georgia after she informed her store manager that she was pregnant, according to allegations made by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in a lawsuit.
The incident occurred on September 15, 2020, about a month after Calleigh Rutledge began working as a sales associate at a Dollar General store in Baldwin, located approximately 80 miles northeast of Atlanta, Georgia.
The EEOC filed the lawsuit in September 2022, claiming that Rutledge, who primarily worked as a cashier, had not requested pregnancy-related or maternity leave and had not indicated her inability to work due to her pregnancy.
According to the EEOC’s legal action, the sales associate was terminated immediately after disclosing her pregnancy to the store manager at Dollar General.
When she inquired about returning to work, the store manager questioned the safety of her working while pregnant. Despite the sales associate’s assurance that she could continue working, the manager refused to allow her to return.
Rutledge later received a separation notice citing “health reasons” as the cause for her termination. According to the EEOC, this conduct constitutes a breach of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The EEOC sought back pay, front pay, compensatory damages, and punitive damages for the employee, as well as injunctive relief to prevent future discrimination.
Dolgencorp, LLC, which operates under the name Dollar General as a nationwide retailer, has announced a settlement with the EEOC regarding the pregnancy discrimination lawsuit.
The company will pay $42,500 and provide other remedies in response to the allegations.
In its response to the lawsuit, Dollar General acknowledged that Rutledge’s employment had been recorded as “voluntarily terminated” for health reasons on September 15, 2020, and confirmed that she had not worked any shifts beyond that date.
However, Dollar General contended that Rutledge was not subjected to differential treatment based on her pregnancy status.
“Dollar General asserts that there is no causal connection between Ms. Rutledge’s sex or alleged pregnancy, and any adverse employment action allegedly suffered by Ms. Rutledge,” Dollar General said in a statement.
In a consent order authorized by the judge on Wednesday, Dollar General agreed to pay $12,750 in back pay damages and $29,750 in compensatory damages as a resolution for the lawsuit.
Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts
New York Governor Kathy Hochul is ramping up security near Jewish Synagogues. In the meantime supporters of Palestine hold a rally in Brooklyn, One America’s Caitlin Sinclair has more.
The Simon Wiesenthal Center is calling out top colleges for being silent over student organizations blaming Israel for the war.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries urges his colleagues across the aisle to quickly elect a new Speaker.
Michigan Democrat Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib continues to display a Palestinian flag outside of her Capitol Hill office, but Ohio congressman Max Miller says he’s introduced a bill to make that a violation of House rules.
Google said on Thursday that it will defend users of generative artificial-intelligence systems in its Google Cloud and Workspace platforms.
China has published proposed security requirements for firms offering services powered by generative artificial intelligence.
Internet companies Google, Amazon and Cloudflare say they have weathered the internet’s largest-known denial of service attack.
Samsung said its preliminary third-quarter profit dropped by a smaller-than-expected 78%.
rnrn
How did Dollar General respond to the allegations of pregnancy discrimination?
Title: Dollar General Settles Pregnancy Discrimination Lawsuit with Former Employee
Introduction:
Dollar General, a well-known discount retailer in the United States, has reached a settlement in a pregnancy discrimination lawsuit filed against them by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The lawsuit alleged that Dollar General terminated an employee after she informed her store manager about her pregnancy. In this article, we will delve into the details of the case and examine the implications surrounding pregnancy discrimination in the workplace.
Background:
The incident took place on September 15, 2020, in a Dollar General store located in Baldwin, Georgia, where Calleigh Rutledge had recently begun working as a sales associate. Roughly a month into her employment, Rutledge informed her store manager about her pregnancy. Following this disclosure, the store terminated her employment. Upon her request to return to work, the store manager questioned the safety of her working while pregnant, ultimately refusing her request.
Legal Action and Allegations:
In response to the termination, the EEOC filed a lawsuit in September 2022 on behalf of Rutledge. The lawsuit claimed that the sales associate had not requested pregnancy-related or maternity leave, nor had she indicated her inability to work due to her pregnancy. The EEOC argued that Dollar General’s immediate termination of Rutledge upon disclosure of her pregnancy and subsequent refusal to allow her to return to work constituted a breach of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits sex-based discrimination.
Settlement:
Dollar General, under its operative name Dolgencorp, LLC, has recently reached a settlement with the EEOC to resolve the allegations of pregnancy discrimination. As part of the settlement, the company has agreed to pay $42,500 and provide other remedies. This includes $12,750 in back pay damages and $29,750 in compensatory damages.
Dollar General’s Response:
In its response to the lawsuit, Dollar General acknowledged that Rutledge’s employment had been recorded as “voluntarily terminated” for health reasons on September 15, 2020. However, the company contended that Rutledge’s pregnancy status played no role in the differential treatment she allegedly experienced. In a statement, Dollar General asserted that there was no causal connection between Rutledge’s sex, alleged pregnancy, and the adverse employment action she claimed.
Conclusion:
The settlement between Dollar General and the EEOC highlights the importance of protecting employees from pregnancy discrimination in the workplace. By reaching this resolution, Dollar General acknowledges the need to comply with federal laws prohibiting sex-based discrimination, emphasizing a commitment to maintain an equitable work environment.
While this settlement provides some resolution for Rutledge, it also serves as a reminder that further efforts are necessary to prevent future instances of pregnancy discrimination. Employers must remain vigilant in ensuring fair treatment and equal opportunities for all employees, regardless of their pregnancy status.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...