Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, EEOC NEWS—Age, disability, or pregnancy discrimination, sexual harassment, retaliation alleged in new lawsuits, (Oct 10, 2025)

By Pamela L. Wolf, J.D.

“The ADA protects applicants and employees who request reasonable accommodations for their disabilities. This includes individuals with substance use disorders who have completed a rehabilitation program and are not currently engaged in illegal drug use.”

The EEOC separately announced its filing of new lawsuits against employers in Louisiana, New York, Colorado, and New Hampshire alleging discrimination based on age, disability, or pregnancy, as well as sexual harassment or retaliation. In three of the five new suits, employers purportedly failed to accommodate workers’ renal disease, substance abuse disorders, or pregnancy-related symptoms.

Refused reassignment as reasonable accommodation. Coca-Cola Bottling Company United, Inc., violated the ADA by failing to accommodate an employee with a disability and then firing him because of his disability, according to the EEOC. The employee worked as a delivery driver in Lafayette, Louisiana; he was diagnosed with renal disease requiring dialysis. After he asked for a change in his work schedule to accommodate his dialysis, the Birmingham, Alabama-based bottler and distributor allegedly determined he could not work a different schedule as an accommodation and told him to apply and compete for other jobs in the company aligned with his medical restrictions. When the employee identified and applied for a job with a schedule allowing him to continue dialysis while working full time, even though he was qualified for the position, the company refused to place him there and then terminated him, the EEOC said.

“It is critical for employers to understand that they have an affirmative legal obligation to make reasonable changes to an employee’s work environment to accommodate an employee’s disability,” said EEOC Senior Trial Attorney Elizabeth Owen. “When an employee can no longer perform the essential duties of his current job, reassignment to a vacant position may be a reasonable accommodation under the ADA.”

The EEOC filed its lawsuit in the Eastern District of Louisiana; the case is No. 2:25-cv-02032.

Failed to protect against supervisor’s sexual harassment. The EEOC claimed in a lawsuit that A.W. Farrell & Son, Inc., part of a group of related commercial roofing companies operating in New York and Pennsylvania, violated Title VII when its failure to address sexual harassment of a journeyman roofer led him to quit. The employer’s supervisor allegedly subjected him to months of unwelcome comments and incidents of physical contact on the job, including an assault severe enough to require medical attention. When the employer reported the harassment, the company failed to address it appropriately and instead suggested the roofer give his harassing supervisor “another chance,” the federal agency said. When he realized the company would not protect him from future harassment, the roofer resigned.

The EEOC brought its lawsuit in the Western District of New York; the case is No. 25-cv-00953.

Discriminated against older nurses. Montrose Memorial Hospital, Inc., dba Montrose Regional Health, violated the ADEA and Title VII when it harassed and discriminated against older employees and retaliated against them when they complained, according to the EEOC. Allegedly, older nurses in the Same Day Surgery/Post-Anesthesia Care Unit at the regional medical center in the San Juan Valley, Colorado, were harassed by two managers, including the chief nursing officer, who said at staff meetings she wanted “younger nurses [to] take over,” wanted “more youthful and energetic” staff, and older workers were “lazy” or not willing to work hard. Older nurses were also purportedly subjected to heightened scrutiny and supervision. When older workers complained about discrimination, Montrose failed to adequately address their complaints, and fired multiple workers in retaliation for complaining, the suit asserted.

In 2016, the EEOC sued the center; that suit was settled in January 2018 by a $400,000 consent decree.

“Age discrimination continues to be a persistent problem in the workplace, and especially in the nursing industry,” said EEOC Regional Attorney Mary Jo O’Neill. “Older nurses come with significant expertise and are an essential part of any medical center’s workforce, and the EEOC is committed to fighting for the rights of all workers, including vulnerable older workers.”

The EEOC filed its lawsuit in the District of Colorado; the case is No. 1:25-cv-03065.

Refused to accommodate nurse with substance abuse disorders. The EEOC claimed that Talecris Plasma Resources violated the ADA when it failed to make reasonable accommodation for a job applicant’s disability and rescinded her job offer based on the need to make reasonable accommodation. A nurse who applied for a position at a Pueblo, Colorado, plasma donation center operated under the Grifols family of companies, allegedly had her job offer revoked after she asked for an accommodation for her alcohol and substance use disorders. The nurse successfully completed a drug rehabilitation program eight months earlier and was participating in a treatment program with Colorado’s Peer Assistance Services, Inc. for health care professionals, according to the EEOC’s lawsuit.

After she was offered the job, the nurse informed Talecris of her disability and that she needed an accommodation. Talecris purportedly refused to accommodate the nurse and rescinded her job offer. The company allegedly refused to provide exceptions from its policies against employing nurses with license restrictions and providing reports as part of treatment programs, even though the applicant’s license restrictions did not impact her ability to perform the job; the report purportedly took about 10 to 15 minutes to complete.

“The ADA protects applicants and employees who request reasonable accommodations for their disabilities,” said EEOC Regional Attorney Mary Jo O’Neill. “This includes individuals with substance use disorders who have completed a rehabilitation program and are not currently engaged in illegal drug use.”

The EEOC brought its lawsuit in the District of Colorado; the case is No. 1:25-cv-03066.

Refused to accommodate pregnancy-related symptoms. Option Care Health, Inc., violated the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act when it failed to provide an employee with reasonable accommodation for symptoms related to her pregnancy, an EEOC lawsuit alleged. An infusion nurse based in New Hampshire, whose job involved visiting patients at their homes and virtually, requested a temporary limit on her assignments to patients closer to her home and/or to virtual visits as an accommodation for her pregnancy symptoms. The nationwide provider of infusion-therapy services allegedly refused to provide her an accommodation, which ultimately resulted in the employee’s forced resignation.

“The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act was enacted so that no employee is forced to choose between the health of their pregnancy and their job,” said EEOC Regional Attorney Kimberly A. Cruz. “The EEOC is here to ensure that employers get the message that they cannot ignore their obligations under the PWFA.”

The EEOC filed its lawsuit in the District of Massachusetts; the case is No. 1:25-cv-12817.

Companies: Coca-Cola Bottling Company United, Inc.; A.W. Farrell & Son, Inc.; Montrose Memorial Hospital, Inc.; Montrose Regional Health; Talecris Plasma Resources; Grifols; Option Care Health, Inc.

News: AgencyNews Discrimination Discharge AgeDiscrimination DisabilityDiscrimination PregnancyDiscrimination Retaliation SexDiscrimination SexualHarassment LitigationNewsTrends