When employees in North Carolina believe they are the victim of workplace discrimination, they typically assert claims under federal civil rights laws. As with many states, North Carolina has a state Equal Employment Practices Act (EEPA). However, that law’s remedies are limited, and most aggrieved individuals therefore prefer to pursue federal claims. In some situations, employees may miss the deadline for filing an administrative charge with the EEOC. Therefore, their only option may be to file suit for wrongful discharge, using the state antidiscrimination law as the required alleged public policy violation.
Last month, the North Carolina Court of Appeals restricted use of EEPA further, concluding that pregnancy does not fall within the classes protected under that law. In the new case, the plaintiff alleged that she was discriminated against and later terminated after informing her employer that she suffered a miscarriage. She sued for wrongful discharge and the employer moved to dismiss the pregnancy discrimination portion of her claim on the basis that EEPA’s protections include sex but not pregnancy.
The North Carolina Court of Appeals agreed, affirming dismissal of this part of the claim. The court stated that the General Assembly has had numerous opportunities to explicitly include pregnancy under EEPA yet has failed to do so. The plaintiff could not point to other North Carolina laws or rules that specifically prohibit discrimination against pregnant workers.
This decision differs from federal cases under Title VII holding that pregnancy discrimination is a form of sex bias. The North Carolina court did reverse dismissal of the plaintiff’s wrongful discharge claim based on sex, and it stated that facts related to pregnancy can be used as evidence of sex discrimination. While this distinction may appear subtle, under this decision, North Carolina employees could not assert a straightforward claim of pregnancy discrimination under state law.
[View source.]
