Save Edge Case

Court case 1: Save Edge sued by EEOC for disability discrimination (EEOC Press release, 6/25/14)

Save Edge is an Ohio-based company, specialised in file sharpening. In 2014, this enterprise offered an applicant, named Anthony Hoover, an operator job, but rescinded it as soon as it learned that he took a prescription drug for a seizure disorder. The EEOC claimed that this action violates the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. This act states that, for employers having fifteen or more employees, it is unlawful, in employment matters, to discriminate against workers with disabilities. In order to be covered by ADA, an employee needs to be able and qualified to perform the essential functions of the job, regardless of his possible disability.

Last year, this fruit grower violated federal law by firing a farm worker for becoming pregnant. Maria Guillen had been working for Tiny’s Organic for 6 years, so successfully that she was promoted to supervisor, when she told her boss that she was pregnant with twins. Nine days later, she got fired. Her employer cited fears for her safety and the company’s liability, although Ms. Guillen’s doctor had cleared her to perform her job without any medical restrictions. The firing of this woman violates the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, which is why the EEOC filed a lawsuit. This act, which is an amendment to Title VII, says that it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of sex, including pregnancy, childbirth and related medical conditions. An employer cannot force a female employee to go on a leave or to resign, as long as she can still work. In other words, employers do not have the authority to decide when and how a pregnant employee should work and therefore they should leave this decision to the employee and her doctor. Paternalistic attitudes can lead to unequal treatment of pregnant workers and should be avoided at all

Moreover, the company will also take steps to prevent future gender and pregnancy discrimination and provide annual training to staff and management in both Spanish and English. Also, procedures for handling complaints will be introduced and supervisors will be held responsible for the implementation and control of these. Tiny’s Organic regrets the unfortunate event and has declared to be very willing to cooperate with the EEOC: it will post a notice regarding the case and it will report annually to the EEOC for the next two years.

This court case has a good and logical outcome: the firing of Ms. Guillen was clearly unjust and discriminatory. She went to the EEOC for help and was heard, as it should