Coordinator Called Her Clinic the Day She Gave Birth to Ask About Leave — She Was Fired for Asking, and the Chain Paid $125,000

Photo credit: AI-generated image created using ChatGPT. Illustrative only.

She wasn’t calling to complain. She wasn’t threatening to quit. She had just given birth, and from that raw, exhausted moment, she reached out to her clinic with a practical question: could she get a brief leave or tweak her schedule so she could recover physically and manage lactation?

According to the EEOC’s announcement, that request is what allegedly got a patient services coordinator at a Brooklyn Heights JAG Physical Therapy location fired in late 2023. Now the physical therapy chain’s operator, PT Administrative Services LLC (doing business as JAG Physical Therapy), has agreed to pay $125,000 and take additional steps to settle a federal lawsuit.

One call, one request, and then the bottom dropped out

The EEOC says the employee was working as a patient services coordinator at JAG’s Brooklyn Heights clinic when she gave birth. The day she delivered, she reached out to ask about a short leave or a schedule change—basic, time-sensitive accommodations that would have helped her recover from childbirth and handle lactation.

The agency alleges JAG didn’t treat it like an ordinary HR request. Instead, JAG allegedly refused to grant those accommodations and “immediately fired” her simply for asking.

That’s the gut-punch moment in this case: a worker asking for breathing room at the exact point her body is most vulnerable, and losing her job for it. The EEOC framed it as punishment for making the request at all, not a disagreement over how to manage staffing.

The legal line the EEOC says was crossed

The case was brought under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), a federal law requiring employers to provide reasonable accommodations for known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions—unless doing so would cause an undue hardship.

The PWFA also bars employers from retaliating or punishing someone for asking about, requesting, or using such accommodations. In other words, the request itself is protected behavior, and the EEOC says that’s where JAG went off the rails.

The agency’s description focuses on accommodations that were practical and specific: a brief leave or a schedule change. Those are the kinds of adjustments that can be the difference between a new parent staying employed or getting pushed out at the worst possible time.

From private dispute to federal court

The EEOC filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, naming PT Administrative Services LLC d/b/a JAG Physical Therapy as the defendant. The case is listed as EEOC v. PT Administrative Services LLC d/b/a JAG Physical Therapy, Case No. 1:25-cv-03615.

Before suing, the EEOC says it tried to resolve the matter through its pre-litigation conciliation process. That’s the step where the agency attempts to negotiate a settlement without filing in court. When that didn’t result in an agreement, the EEOC moved forward with litigation.

For the employee, that timeline matters. The alleged firing happened in late 2023, and the settlement announcement didn’t arrive until June 2026. Even when a case ends without a trial, a worker can spend years living with the consequences of losing income and stability right after childbirth—exactly the period when expenses and stress spike.

The $125,000 check is only part of the settlement

The $125,000 payment is the headline number, but the settlement also includes a package of non-monetary requirements meant to change how the company handles requests tied to pregnancy and childbirth going forward.

Under the consent decree, JAG must provide training for managers and human resources employees. It also has to significantly revise its employee handbook to address accommodations and protections under the PWFA, and it must send an annual message from the director of human resources reminding employees about those rights.

On top of that, the decree requires compliance-related reporting to the EEOC. That’s the part that turns a one-time settlement into ongoing oversight—at least for the duration of the decree—because the agency will be expecting proof the policies aren’t just words on paper.

The part people tend to fixate on: asking shouldn’t be risky

In workplace disputes around leave and accommodations, a lot of workers learn the hard way that what they say—and how they say it—can change everything. This case is built around the idea that the request itself triggered the punishment, which is precisely what the PWFA is designed to prevent.

Even without a public comment section attached to the EEOC release, you can see why the details land the way they do. The employee didn’t wait weeks, didn’t file a complaint first, didn’t stage a confrontation. She reached out the day she gave birth to ask what her options were. The allegation is that the employer responded by cutting her loose immediately.

It’s also why the settlement’s “other relief” focuses on training, handbook language, and repeated internal reminders. When a manager or HR department treats accommodation requests like a threat or an inconvenience, it doesn’t just affect one person—it shapes what everyone else is willing to ask for. The annual message requirement is a direct attempt to stop that chilling effect.

A settlement with a warning label for employers

In the EEOC’s telling, the worker who was fired kept pushing even after losing her job at an “extremely vulnerable time.” Trial attorney Daniel Seltzer said her willingness to come forward means other employees will receive childbirth- and pregnancy-related accommodations “to which they’re entitled.”

Arlean Nieto, acting director of the EEOC’s New York District, said the agency is committed to enforcing the PWFA and making sure employers understand their accommodation obligations. That’s the institutional message behind the dollar figure: this law isn’t theoretical, and the government is willing to litigate when a company allegedly punishes a request.

For JAG, the settlement locks in a concrete cost—$125,000—plus policy changes, training, and monitoring. For workers watching from the sidelines, the bigger takeaway is simpler: asking for a reasonable childbirth-related accommodation is not supposed to be the kind of thing that costs you your job, and the EEOC is signaling it will treat that kind of alleged retaliation as a serious violation.