Each month, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) files lawsuits and settles cases covering the federal laws they are responsible for enforcing. These federal laws include:
- Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII)
- The Pregnancy Discrimination Act
- The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act of 2022 (PWFA)
- The Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA)
- The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA)
- Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA)
- Sections 102 and 103 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991
- Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
- The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA)
Below is a list of lawsuits and settlements by the EEOC in from December 16 to 31, 2025.
- EEOC Lawsuits
- California: Federal Court Orders Vallarta Food Enterprises to Comply with EEOC Subpoenas
- Illinois: EEOC Sues Advocate Aurora Health for Religious Discrimination
- Minnesota: EEOC Sues U.S. Steel for Pregnancy Discrimination and Retaliation
- Maryland: EEOC Sues Horseshoe Casino and Caesars Entertainment Companies for Disability Discrimination and Retaliation
- Ohio: EEOC Sues Wendy’s for Disability and Age Discrimination
- Wisconsin: EEOC Sues United Pride Dairy for National Origin Discrimination and Sexual Harassment
- EEOC Settlements
EEOC Lawsuits
California: Federal Court Orders Vallarta Food Enterprises to Comply with EEOC Subpoenas
Allegations
Race discrimination; National origin discrimination
Laws Involved
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
State
California
Summary
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced today that a federal court ordered Vallarta Food Enterprises, Inc., and related companies, a supermarket chain with approximately 80 locations in Central and Southern California, to fully comply with subpoenas the agency issued in September 2024 relating to Commissioner-initiated charges.
Specifically, the charge alleged that Vallarta Supermarkets failed or refused to recruit, hire, or promote individuals based on their race (white, black, and/or Asian) and national origin (non-Hispanic).
The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California ordered Vallarta Supermarkets to produce all requested applicant and employee data to determine if Vallarta Supermarkets is engaging in unlawful hiring practices by excluding non-Hispanic individuals from employment. The Court also noted its deference in EEOC subpoena enforcement proceedings, saying “judicial review is quite narrow.”
Illinois: EEOC Sues Advocate Aurora Health for Religious Discrimination
Allegations
Religious discrimination
Laws Involved
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
State
Illinois
Summary
The EEOC’s lawsuit alleged that 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. When the employee, consistent with her religious beliefs, declined to receive the vaccination, Advocate Health terminated her, according to the suit.
Minnesota: EEOC Sues U.S. Steel for Pregnancy Discrimination and Retaliation
Allegations
Pregnancy discrimination
Laws Involved
Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
State
Minnesota
Summary
According to the lawsuit, an experienced mining equipment operator at U.S. Steel’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. Although the company later let her come back to work, it first assigned her to work inconsistent with her medical restrictions and then removed her from her normal role altogether. She spent the rest of her pregnancy in a menial office job with reduced earning potential.
The lawsuit further alleged that U.S. Steel retaliated against her after her pregnancy, by denying her higher-paying assignments and sending her to more difficult and less desirable jobs in remote areas of the mine.
Maryland: EEOC Sues Horseshoe Casino and Caesars Entertainment Companies for Disability Discrimination and Retaliation
Allegations
Disability discrimination; Reasonable accommodations; Retaliation
Laws Involved
Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
State
Maryland
Summary
According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, the companies discriminated against a man who worked as a table games dealer at their Horseshoe Casino in Baltimore, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The employee became ill while working on the casino floor and was transported to a local hospital in April 2023. The suit alleged that after the employee underwent disability-related surgery, he inquired about returning to work and asked for information about accommodations but the casino companies failed to engage in an interactive process, did not provide accommodations, unlawfully concluded that 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 suit said.
Ohio: EEOC Sues Wendy’s for Disability and Age Discrimination
Allegations
Age discrimination; Disability discrimination; Reasonable accommodations
Laws Involved
Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
State
Ohio
Summary
According to the lawsuit, Wendy’s International, LLC, which owns and operates fast food restaurants nationwide, employed a district manager who worked for the company and its franchises 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 demonstrated a preference for younger workers in the years surrounding the district manager’s termination, according to the EEOC.
Wisconsin: EEOC Sues United Pride Dairy for National Origin Discrimination and Sexual Harassment
Allegations
Sex discrimination; National origin discrimination; Harassment
Laws Involved
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
State
California
Summary
According to the EEOC’s suit, United Pride promised three Mexican nationals professional and/or management positions when they were hired and submitted the same information to the U.S. Embassy for their TN Visa applications. But when the three Mexican nationals arrived on the farm, the dairy denied the promised positions and instead gave them laborer positions and assigned more arduous tasks and shifts to Mexican workers. When a Mexican worker complained, a manager at United Pride Dairy justified the disparate work assignment based on a negative stereotype of American workers, saying “Americans are lazy,” according to the suit.
EEOC Settlements
California: Meathead Movers Settles EEOC Discrimination Cases
Allegations
Age discrimination; Sex discrimination
Laws Involved
Age Discrimination in Employment Act; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
State
California
Summary
The company agreed to hire qualified individuals into various positions including laborers, movers, customer service agents, and other positions, committing up to $1 million annually for four years towards agreeing to hiring aggrieved workers / individuals, i.e. workers who applied, were otherwise qualified, but for discrimination, were not hired, making the total settlement value possibly as high as $6 million.
The EEOC lawsuit – filed in 2023 – alleged that since at least 2017, Meathead Movers failed to recruit and to hire individuals over the age of 40 and advertised in a way to deter older workers from applying for positions. The EEOC further alleged that the company had, among other things, subjective hiring criteria favoring very young workers, serving as a proxy for age.
Florida: EEOC Recovers $135,000 for Florida Employees Under Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
Allegations
Pregnancy discrimination; Reasonable accommodations
Laws Involved
Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
State
Florida
Summary
The first charge, against Brandt Information Services, Inc., a technology solutions company based in Tallahassee, Florida, claimed the company terminated a pregnant employee in November 2023 after she requested two and a half months of unpaid leave as a reasonable accommodation under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA). Under the terms of the conciliation agreement, Brandt will pay the former employee $100,000 and provide robust injunctive relief, including implementation of a new policy allowing employees to request leave as a reasonable accommodation under the PWFA, even if they do not qualify for leave under the Family Medical Leave Act.
Georgia: 1st Franklin Financial Corporation to Pay $750,000 in EEOC Disability Discrimination Suit
Allegations
Disability discrimination; Reasonable accommodations
Laws Involved
Americans with Disabilities Act
State
Georgia
Summary
According to the suit, since 2022, 1st Franklin denied reasonable accommodations to its employees with disabilities and offered no alternative accommodations, including when its employees requested leave as an accommodation. One former customer service representative had multiple medical conditions contributing to heart attacks, requiring hospitalization. He requested a short leave of absence until he expected to be released from the hospital, but the company denied the request and terminated him, according to the suit.