Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, EEOC--Agency pursues subpoenas and files new lawsuit in race, pregnancy, and religious bias claims, (Feb 11, 2026)

By George Basharis, J.D.

The agency’s subpoena enforcement proceedings target alleged systemic race discrimination, while a newly filed lawsuit accuses a hotel management company of pregnancy and religious discrimination and retaliation.

The EEOC announced a trio of enforcement developments spanning systemic race discrimination investigations and a newly filed discrimination and retaliation lawsuit across multiple industries and jurisdictions. The announcements include subpoena enforcement actions against two national employers, one involving allegations of race-based hiring discrimination against black job candidates and another centered on claims that corporate diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives may have disadvantaged white employees. In a separate matter, the agency sued a hotel management company in Illinois, alleging pregnancy and religious discrimination and retaliation under Title VII and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.

Alleged nationwide hiring discrimination at NAPA Auto Parts. The EEOC filed an action in federal court seeking to enforce an investigative subpoena issued to Genuine Parts Company, which does business as NAPA Auto Parts. The agency is investigating allegations that the Atlanta-headquartered automotive and industrial parts distributor engaged in race discrimination against Black job candidates in violation of Title VII.

According to the EEOC, the investigation stems from a Commissioner’s Charge filed in May 2024 by EEOC Commissioner Kalpana Kotagal. The charge alleges that Genuine Parts may have engaged in a nationwide failure to hire and recruit African American applicants beginning in or around 2019. The charge remains under investigation.

As part of that investigation, the EEOC issued a subpoena seeking information and documents related to the company’s hiring and recruitment practices. The requests sought, among other things, applicant and employee data, identification of company locations and open positions, materials describing hiring and recruitment procedures, and information concerning internal or external complaints of discrimination.

The agency alleged that Genuine Parts failed to fully comply with the subpoena, prompting the EEOC to file a subpoena enforcement action after efforts to obtain voluntary compliance were unsuccessful. The enforcement action asks the court to compel production of the requested information so the agency can complete its investigation.

“Title VII’s prohibition on race-based employment discrimination is colorblind, and its protections apply equally to all workers,” EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas said in a statement announcing the filing. “The Commission will continue to use every tool Congress has provided to enforce the law, and when employers refuse to comply, the EEOC will not hesitate to use its full legal authority.”

The EEOC filed the subpoena enforcement action in the Northern District of Texas; the case is No. 3:26-mc-00009.

DEI-related discrimination allegations against NIKE. In a separate subpoena enforcement action announced one day earlier, the EEOC sought a court order compelling NIKE, Inc. to produce information in connection with an investigation into alleged race discrimination against white employees and applicants.

The agency alleges that NIKE engaged in a pattern or practice of intentional race discrimination tied to its diversity, equity, and inclusion-related initiatives, including its 2025 “Targets” and other DEI objectives. According to the EEOC, the investigation focuses on whether those initiatives resulted in disparate treatment of white employees, applicants, and participants in training and development programs.

The EEOC stated that the investigation encompasses alleged discriminatory decisions involving hiring, promotion, demotion, separation, and selection for layoffs, as well as access to internship, mentoring, leadership development, and other career advancement programs. Some of the information sought by the agency dates back to 2018.

Among the categories of information requested were criteria used to select employees for layoffs, data reflecting how the company tracks and uses race and ethnicity information, including whether such data factored into executive compensation decisions, and documentation related to 16 programs that allegedly offered race-restricted mentoring or career development opportunities.

The agency alleged that NIKE failed to produce all information required by the subpoena, leading the EEOC to file an enforcement action after attempting to secure voluntary compliance.

“When there are compelling indications, including corporate admissions in extensive public materials, that an employer’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion-related programs may violate federal prohibitions against race discrimination or other forms of unlawful discrimination, the EEOC will take all necessary steps, including subpoena enforcement actions, to ensure the opportunity to fully and comprehensively investigate,” Lucas said.

Lucas added that Title VII’s prohibition on race discrimination “is colorblind and requires the EEOC to protect employees of all races from unlawful employment practices.”

The EEOC filed the subpoena enforcement action in the Eastern District of Missouri; the case is No. 4:26-mc-00128.

Hotel Equities sued over pregnancy and religious accommodations. A lawsuit filed against Hotel Equities Group, LLC, a full-service hotel management company, alleges pregnancy discrimination, religious discrimination, and retaliation in violation of federal law. According to the EEOC, the alleged violations occurred in 2023 at a Hilton-branded hotel in Oak Lawn, Illinois. The EEOC alleged that a pregnant front desk clerk requested a reasonable accommodation allowing her to sit at the front desk due to pregnancy-related medical needs. While a coworker initially provided a chair, management later removed it and replaced it with a small, backless stool, discouraged the employee from using it, and ultimately terminated her employment after she requested the accommodation.

The lawsuit also alleges that a second front desk clerk, who served as an assistant pastor at a Baptist church, requested not to be scheduled for Saturday overnight shifts because those shifts interfered with his ability to attend and sometimes lead Sunday morning church services. Although management initially expressed approval, the EEOC alleged that the employee continued to be scheduled for Saturday nights. After he objected, the company allegedly retaliated by cutting his hours.

“Employees have a right to request and receive religious and pregnancy-related accommodations in the workplace without fear of retaliation,” said Catherine Eschbach, the EEOC’s acting general counsel. “When employers deny lawful accommodations and retaliate against workers for speaking up, the EEOC will take action.”

The EEOC alleged that the conduct violated both the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) and Title VII. The PWFA requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, absent undue hardship. Title VII separately requires reasonable accommodation of an employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs and prohibits retaliation against employees who request protected accommodations. The agency said it initiated the suit after attempting to resolve the matter through its administrative conciliation process.

The EEOC filed its lawsuit in the Northern District of Illinois; the case is No. 1:26-cv-01217.

Companies: NIKE; Genuine Parts Company; NAPA Auto Parts; Hotel Equities Group, LLC; Hilton

News: AgencyNews LitigationNewsTrends RaceDiscrimination Discrimination PregnancyDiscrimination ReligiousDiscrimination Layoffs Discharge