Suit: Woman fired from customer service job because of pregnancy

SHARE Suit: Woman fired from customer service job because of pregnancy

A woman was fired last year from her position as a customer service representative at a west suburban kitchen supply store because she was pregnant, according to a federal lawsuit.

Caryn Rumshas was fired from her job at Cook’s Direct, at 27725 W. Diehl Rd. in Warrenville, in June 2013, about a month after she informed her supervisors that she was pregnant, according to the lawsuit filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court.

The company discriminated against Rumshas on the basis of her sex and pregnancy, and therefore violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the lawsuit claims.

Rumshas filed a discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and received a Notice of Right to Sue on Feb. 10, 2014, according to the lawsuit.

In January 2013, Rumshas was hired as a customer service representative at Cook’s Direct and was considered a contract employee, the suit said.

At the time, the lawsuit claims one of her supervisors said in an email, “You are the first and only ex-employee that I can remember that left and was re-hired except for the pregnant ladies and we have to bring them back by law, please don’t get PG – we need to get over the loss of the last two!!”

By May 2013, Rumshas began a probationary period as a full-time employee, the lawsuit claims.

Again, a supervisor told her, “just don’t get pregnant,” according to the suit.

However, in March 2013 Rumshas became pregnant and in June 2013 she was fired, according to the lawsuit. She claims in the suit that she was was told she was being terminated for financial reasons.

The one-count lawsuit seeks at least $100,000 in damages.

A representative from Cook’s Direct could not be immediately reached for comment Wednesday evening.

The Latest
Like films about WeCrash and Fyre Festival, stylish HBO doc tells classic story of a big idea falling hard.
It happens all over Chicago. Some folks offer a perfunctory “everyone supports housing” statement before angrily demonstrating that they are, in fact, not meaningfully supportive of new housing.
The lack of a defined, public strategy isn’t a criticism of city officials. The goal is to show that Chicago can embrace protest and the exercise of free speech rights.
Man is upset that she’ll be standing up at the service along with her ex.
If Democrats wanted to change the rules for nominating candidates, they should have waited until 2025, a non-election year. Even then, it would need some lively debate. Oh, wait, maybe that’s what they were trying to avoid.