Rooter ProXpress fired pregnant worker after leave request, EEOC alleges

Weeks later, the filing says, that same supervisor issued a written warning about the worker’s absences – even though the supervisor had approved the time off, and at least two of the flagged absences were for pregnancy-related medical appointments.

The events moved quickly from there, according to the complaint. On May 8, 2024, the worker asked her supervisor for one day off, citing pregnancy-related high blood pressure, nausea, and round ligament pain. She said the day was to protect her health and her baby’s, the filing states. The supervisor’s reply, according to the complaint: “Ok no problem . . . feel better.” She returned to work on May 10. That day, the EEOC alleges, the office manager told her she had already been fired the day before – for “excessive” time off without approval.

The complaint also cites a remark it attributes to the supervisor. The office manager, it says, told another employee that the supervisor had said, “let’s get rid of [the worker]. She’s pregnant and having a baby . . . She’s irresponsible, she didn’t show up for work.”

For HR leaders, the EEOC’s account reads like a training slide. Two moves sit at the center of the agency’s theory: disciplining an employee for absences a manager had already signed off on, and terminating her right after a protected request. The agency alleges the company fired the worker within one day of her leave request – the kind of tight timing that tends to draw scrutiny from investigators and juries alike.

The case is also a reminder that manager comments carry weight. A single remark linking a firing to pregnancy, even repeated second-hand, can become the backbone of a discrimination claim.