EEOC Files First Subpoena Enforcement Action Under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
- Spire-Law
- Apr 10
- 3 min read
This article is from the U.S. EEOC: https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/eeoc-files-agencys-first-subpoena-enforcement-action-under-pregnant-workers-fairness-act The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has taken its first legal action to enforce a subpoena under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), signaling the agency’s commitment to vigorously enforcing the new law and holding employers accountable for pregnancy-related discrimination.
The EEOC announced it had filed suit in federal court against R&L Carriers Shared Services, LLC, a freight transportation and logistics company headquartered in Illinois. The action was brought to enforce compliance with a subpoena issued during the investigation of a sex and pregnancy discrimination charge filed by one of the company’s drivers.
The Background
The EEOC is currently investigating a charge filed by a female driver at R&L Carriers’ Matteson, Illinois location. The employee alleges that the company:
Discriminated against her based on her sex
Failed to accommodate her pregnancy-related work restrictions
Placed her on involuntary unpaid leave, instead of exploring reasonable accommodations
As part of the investigation, the EEOC issued a subpoena requesting information including:
A list of employees (with contact information) at the Matteson location from 2023 to present
A list of drivers across multiple states (Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, South Dakota, North Dakota) who requested pregnancy-related accommodations from June 27, 2023 (the effective date of the PWFA) to the present
After R&L Carriers refused to comply, the EEOC filed a subpoena enforcement action (EEOC v. R&L Carrier Shared Services, LLC, Case No. 25-cv-528) in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
Understanding the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA)
The PWFA, effective June 27, 2023, requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, unless doing so would cause undue hardship.
Critically, the PWFA prohibits employers from:
Automatically placing pregnant employees on leave when other reasonable accommodations—like light duty or modified tasks—are available
Denying accommodations when they would allow the employee to temporarily continue working
The EEOC is tasked with investigating and enforcing the PWFA alongside Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
EEOC’s Message to Employers
According to Amrith Kaur Aakre, District Director of the EEOC’s Chicago Office:
“Assuring expeditious investigation of all charges, particularly those under a new law like the PWFA, is a priority… It is important that we obtain relevant information to be able to determine whether the law is being violated.”
Regional Attorney Gregory Gochanour added:
“If an employer fails to comply with a subpoena issued during an investigation… the EEOC will seek court enforcement so that investigations can be completed and a determination made without unnecessary delay.”
Shortly after the lawsuit was filed, R&L Carriers withdrew its objections and agreed to produce the requested information.
Key Takeaways for Employers
This enforcement action is a strong signal to employers that the EEOC is prioritizing compliance with the PWFA. Employers should:
Review current policies and procedures related to pregnancy, childbirth, and accommodations
Ensure front-line supervisors and HR staff are trained on the new law’s requirements
Avoid automatic unpaid leave placements for pregnant employees without exploring alternatives
Respond promptly to EEOC requests during investigations—including subpoenas—to avoid legal action
Final Thoughts
The EEOC’s first subpoena enforcement under the PWFA sets an important precedent. Employers must take pregnancy-related accommodation requests seriously and engage in the interactive process in good faith. This case also highlights the importance of transparency during federal investigations and the legal consequences of noncompliance.
Comments