A doctor's note, a denied chair, and a swift exit—the EEOC wants answers
A pregnant hotel employee asked to sit down at work. According to federal regulators, she was out of a job within a month.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed suit on February 3, 2026, against Hotel Equities Group, LLC, a company that manages more than 200 hotels across the United States. The agency alleges the company violated the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in its treatment of two front desk clerks at the Hilton Chicago/Oak Lawn in Illinois.
The case, which remains in its early stages with no final determination yet made, outlines how routine accommodation requests allegedly gave way to retaliation.
The first employee joined the hotel on or around June 3, 2023. Weeks later, on or around June 27, she submitted a doctor's note asking to sit when possible during her shifts. She had previously miscarried and was experiencing nausea and high blood pressure related to her pregnancy.
While still waiting for a response, she and at least two coworkers—a maintenance employee and a Task Force Manager—located a high-top chair from the hotel bar and brought it to the front desk. According to the filing, she was able to perform her job duties with the chair.
That arrangement did not last. The General Manager deemed the chair inappropriate and sent her home. She returned the following day to find two stools waiting for her—which the EEOC contends were not effective due to their height, width, and lack of back support. The agency further alleges the General Manager discouraged her from using even those.
Within three weeks, her shifts dropped to one day a week. Approximately a month after her initial request, she was removed from the schedule entirely, terminating her employment.
A second employee faced retaliation of a different kind, according to the filing. Hired on or around early May 2023, he was an assistant pastor at a Baptist church who made clear during his interview that he could not work Saturday overnight shifts—he participated in and occasionally led Sunday morning services. The Director of Rooms assured him it would not be an issue.
It became one. The General Manager scheduled him for Saturday overnights anyway. When he raised the matter again, the scheduling continued. By late June, his hours began shrinking, eventually falling from four shifts a week to one.
The EEOC describes both sets of actions as intentional and carried out with malice or reckless indifference to the employees' federally protected rights.
The agency is seeking injunctive relief, back pay, compensatory and punitive damages, and a jury trial.
For HR professionals, the case offers a blunt reminder: how an organization responds to an accommodation request—especially in the weeks that follow—can land it in federal court. The ask here was modest. The fallout, according to regulators, was not.
