The EEOC has filed a lawsuit alleging that the company limited the number of pregnant employees, a clear violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.  One wonders how this business arrangement could exist in today’s society.

At Gardner Employment Law, we try to help our readers and clients stay current in legal developments on our Blog page.  Read on to learn more about the case regarding an alleged one-pregnant-employee limit.

What is the Case of EEOC v. Dallas Barber and Stylist College About?

In EEOC v. Dallas Barber and Stylist College, the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) recently sued Dallas Barber and Stylist College, located in Dallas, Texas, because the company would not hire a woman who was pregnant.  The owner allegedly stated that they already had a pregnant employee and he did not want two pregnant women at the school. According to court documents, Dallas Barber indicated it did not want to deal with the pregnant woman’s “condition,” referring to her pregnancy.

In the lawsuit, the EEOC alleges that the employer refused to hire a qualified hair braider applicant because she was pregnant, citing that they already had one pregnant employee and didn’t want to “deal with” another.  After the applicant successfully passed a skills test, the company’s owner found out about her pregnancy and rescinded the job offer.  Text messages allegedly sent by the owner revealed a clear bias against hiring the woman due to her pregnancy, with one message stating, “We are dealing with a pregnant instructor now and it’s a much too uncomfortable situation.”

This would constitute pregnancy discrimination, violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act.  These statutes  prohibit employment discrimination based on sex, including pregnancy.  The law guarantees that all employees, pregnant or not, are entitled to equal opportunities in the workforce.  While these allegations are not yet proven, if the EEOC can substantiate them, the company could be facing serious legal consequences.

How Does Pregnancy Discrimination Impact Professional Women?

For all working women, especially those in leadership or executive positions, navigating a career while pregnant or after childbirth can bring unique challenges that their male counterparts rarely encounter.  This is true even in the normal circumstance.  But compounding that situation with discrimination because of pregnancy could ruin a women’s promising career.

The pressures of balancing pregnancy and career advancement can be significant:

• Career breaks: Many women pause their careers to have children, often losing momentum in their professional growth.  During this time, they may miss out on promotions or key opportunities.
• False Assumptions about commitment: Pregnant women are often perceived as less committed to their jobs, even though they remain fully capable of performing their duties.  These assumptions can lead to being overlooked for projects or leadership roles.
• Workplace bias: Even after childbirth, women may struggle with biases related to their ability to juggle professional responsibilities and family life, putting them at a disadvantage in comparison to men, who are rarely scrutinized for similar reasons.

Pregnancy is a natural part of life, but it should not become a barrier to professional success.  Many mothers are superb leaders and managers.  Unfortunately, the Dallas Barber School case demonstrates that, in some workplaces, pregnancy can still be seen as an inconvenience, rather than simply a temporary phase of life that should be accommodated.

While the EEOC’s lawsuit focuses on a clear legal violation, it also highlights a broader issue that many professional women face: the impact of pregnancy on their careers.  Legal protections like Title VII and the EEOC’s actions are crucial, but changing workplace culture and attitudes is just as important to ensure that women aren’t forced to choose between family and career success.

What Are the Pregnancy Discrimination Laws that Protect Employees?

Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e, et seq., as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, clearly forbids employers from making hiring decisions based on an applicant’s pregnancy status.  Despite these legal protections, cases like this show that discrimination still occurs, often under the guise of business concerns.

The alleged text messages from the Dallas Barber owner provide an explicit example of pregnancy discrimination:

• • “Some companies don’t hire people who are advanced in pregnancy.”
  • “We are sorry for your situation. . .”
  • Your condition, now we will not be able to deal with it.”

Such statements, if true, reveal a deep misunderstanding of the law and the rights of pregnant employees.  Title VII does not allow employers to limit the number of pregnant workers or make hiring decisions based on pregnancy-related concerns.  The EEOC’s lawsuit is a reminder that employers who violate these laws can face significant legal and financial repercussions.

The case also raises questions about how widespread these discriminatory practices may be, particularly in smaller businesses where formal HR policies might not be as robust or well-enforced.  It serves as a warning to employers about the legal risks of allowing bias — conscious or unconscious — to influence employment decisions.

Contact an Expert.

As the EEOC moves forward with its lawsuit against Dallas Barber and Stylist College, the outcome could have significant implications for the enforcement of pregnancy discrimination laws.  This case underscores the importance of holding employers accountable and ensuring that all job applicants are treated fairly, regardless of their pregnancy status.  If you have questions, contact us today.