Go to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.comGo to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.com
VitalLaw®
  • Find answers to your questions
  • Log in to access your subscriptions
In depth. On point.
In depth. On point.
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
In depth. On point.
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations
    • NLRB NEWS—Board now has a quorum with two new members sworn in
    • DISCRIMINATION—9th Cir.: Preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of WLAD against religious organization that hires co-religionists affirmed
    • DISCRIMINATION—AGE—M.D. Pa.: Decisionmakers’ alleged remarks reflecting pre-firing concern about employee’s age bolsters ADEA claim
    • DISCRIMINATION—E.D. La.: Salesperson, terminated after alleged performance issues, fails to advance various claims
    • DISCRIMINATION—RACE—4th Cir.: African-American police officer, fired after bachelorette party altercation, stated race discrimination claim
    • EEOC NEWS—Agency sues employers over failure to comply with ADA, ADEA, Title VII, PWFA non-discrimination mandates
    • EXPERT INSIGHTS—Back in Business: EEOC’s Restored Quorum Explained and a Look Forward to 2026
    • EXPERT INSIGHTS—New Weighted Selection Process for H-1B Cap Lottery Set to Take Effect in 2026
    • FDIC NEWS—OIG closes investigations into allegations of misconduct, fraud within organization
    • FEDERAL REGULATIONS—DOL rescinds WIOA guidance construing ‘because of... sex’ in Title IX to include transgender status and gender identity
    • LABOR—ARBITRATION—Union president’s Discord post found to incite prohibited work stoppage
    • LABOR—NLRB WEEKLY SUMMARY—Weekly summary of NLRB decisions
    • LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—Union sues Texas ed agency alleging baseless investigations of educators after Kirk assassination
    • ON THE LABOR FRONT—New York’s Purported NLRA Preemption Circumvention Thwarted. Is California’s Next?
    • PENSION AND BENEFIT PLANS—9th Cir.: Employer avoids withdrawal liability for pension contributions since MPPAA’s entertainment exception applied
    • RETALIATION—W.D. La.: EEOC proved retaliation against Black employee who complained her supervisor asked if she attended BLM protests
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations

    Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, EEOC NEWS—Agency sues employers over failure to comply with ADA, ADEA, Title VII, PWFA non-discrimination mandates, (Jan 7, 2026)

    Organizations Mentioned:Advocate Aurora Health | CBAC Borrower, LLC | Caesars Baltimore Management Co. LLC | Caesars Entertainment, Inc. | Horseshoe Casino | U.S. Steel | Wendy’s International, LLC

    By Pamela Wolf, J.D.

    “It is important that employers understand that the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act created new and meaningful legal protections for pregnant workers. Employers should promptly review and update their workplace policies and practices to ensure t ...

    By Pamela Wolf, J.D.

    “It is important that employers understand that the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act created new and meaningful legal protections for pregnant workers. Employers should promptly review and update their workplace policies and practices to ensure they comply with the law.”

    As 2024 came to a close, the EEOC separately filed four unrelated new lawsuits against employers in Maryland, Ohio, Minnesota, and Illinois, raising claims of disability, age, pregnancy, and religious discrimination, among others. Two of the employers went awry when they purportedly refused to let employees return to work after disability related surgery unless they had no restrictions.

    Refused to consider accommodations for disability. Casino operators CBAC Borrower, LLC, dba Horseshoe Casino, Caesars Baltimore Management Co., LLC, and Caesars Entertainment, Inc., violated the ADA when they discriminated against an employee based on his disability and engaged in unlawful retaliation and interference, according to a new EEOC lawsuit. A man who worked as a table games dealer at the Horseshoe Casino in Baltimore became ill while working on the casino floor and was transported to a local hospital in April 2023. After he underwent disability related surgery, he inquired about returning to work and asked for information about accommodations but the casino companies allegedly failed to engage in an interactive process, did not provide accommodations, unlawfully concluded the employee could work only if he had no restrictions, fired him, and refused to reinstate or rehire him. The companies also unlawfully retaliated against the employee and interfered with protections provided to him by the ADA, the EEOC said.

    “Employers must not discriminate against disabled workers by preventing their return from medical leave because they have disability related restrictions,” said EEOC Regional Attorney Debra Lawrence. “Employers have a duty to engage in an interactive process to identify and provide reasonable accommodations. The Commission is committed to enforcing the rights secured by the ADA and remedying unlawful retaliation and interference with those rights.”

    The EEOC filed its lawsuit in the District of Maryland; the case is No. 1:25-cv-04297.

    Refused to permit return to work after surgery despite medical release. Wendy’s International, LLC, violated the ADA and ADEA when it discriminated against a district manager because of his disability and his age, the EEOC alleged in a lawsuit. The owner and operator of fast food restaurants nationwide employed the district manager since the early 1990s. In 2022, the Columbus, Ohio-based district manager, who was in his early 50s, went on approved medical leave for disability related surgery. Although his healthcare provider released him to return to work after surgery, Wendy’s would not let him return, required him to remain on leave, conditioned his employment on his ability to work without any restrictions, and then fired him, according to the lawsuit. Wendy’s also purportedly demonstrated a preference for younger workers in the years surrounding the district manager’s termination.

    The EEOC brought its lawsuit in the Southern District of Ohio; the case is No. 2:25-cv-01516.

    Failure to accommodate high-risk pregnancy. The EEOC alleged that U.S. Steel violated the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) when a multinational steel and iron mining company failed to provide an employee with a reasonable accommodation for her pregnancy. An experienced mining equipment operator at the company’s Minntac mine in northern Minnesota needed to avoid working on the most physically jarring machinery as an accommodation during her high-risk pregnancy. Instead of temporarily allowing her to do other work within her job description, U.S. Steel placed her on an involuntary leave for several weeks, according to the EEOC. Although the company later let her come back to work, it allegedly first assigned her to work inconsistent with her medical restrictions and then removed her from her normal role altogether. She purportedly spent the rest of her pregnancy in a menial office job with reduced earning potential.

    Further, U.S. Steel retaliated against the employee after her pregnancy, the EEOC said, by denying her higher-paying assignments and sending her to more difficult and less desirable jobs in remote areas of the mine.

    “It is important that employers understand that the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act created new and meaningful legal protections for pregnant workers,” noted acting EEOC General Counsel Catherine Eschbach. “Employers should promptly review and update their workplace policies and practices to ensure they comply with the law.”

    PWFA resources. The PWFA went into effect on June 27, 2023. Resources for employees, employers, and healthcare providers are available here.

    The EEOC filed its lawsuit in the District of Minnesota; the case is No. 0:25-cv-04721.

    Denied Covid vax exemption. Advocate Aurora Health, an Illinois-based hospital system, violated Title VII when it refused to accommodate a nurse’s religious beliefs and fired her for failing to receive a COVID-19 vaccination, the EEOC claimed in a new lawsuit. In 2021, Advocate Health implemented a policy mandating that all employees receive a COVID-19 vaccination unless they were granted an exemption because of their religious beliefs. A nurse requested a religious exemption in accordance with the policy, and although Advocate Health previously granted her a “lifetime” religious exemption from receiving the flu vaccine, it denied her request for an exemption from COVID-19 vaccination, according to the EEOC. When the employee, consistent with her religious beliefs, declined to receive the vaccination, Advocate Health allegedly terminated her.

    The EEOC brought its lawsuit in the Northern District of Illinois; the case is No. 1:25-cv-15411.

    Companies: CBAC Borrower, LLC; Horseshoe Casino; Caesars Baltimore Management Co. LLC; Caesars Entertainment, Inc.; Wendy’s International, LLC; U.S. Steel; Advocate Aurora Health

    News: AgencyNews Discharge Discrimination AgeDiscrimination DisabilityDiscrimination PregnancyDiscrimination ReligiousDiscrimination Retaliation Covid19 LitigationNewsTrends

    © 2026 CCH Incorporated and its affiliates and licensors. All rights reserved.

    • Manage Cookie Preferences
    • Privacy Statement
    • Terms of Use