Federal Court Dismisses Pregnancy Discrimination Suit by Former NC Deputy Fire Marshal

A federal district court has dismissed a lawsuit brought by a former Deputy Fire Marshal with the Raleigh Fire Department who alleged she was constructively discharged following the City’s denial of her request to work from home to breastfeed her newborn child.

Rachel Harless brought suit against the City under several employment discrimination statutes, including the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Providing Urgent Maternal Protections (PUMP) Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA), and a claim of constructive discharge. The City moved to dismiss the case under Rule 12(b)(6), and the court granted that motion in full.

According to the complaint, Harless gave birth in April 2023 and returned from maternity leave in July 2023. She alleged that upon her return, the City did not initially provide her with a private space to express breast milk and subsequently denied her requests to work remotely a few days a week so that she could breastfeed her child directly. She claimed this led to a significant drop in milk supply and negatively affected her infant’s health. Harless resigned in August 2023, asserting she was constructively discharged due to the City’s refusal to accommodate her requests.

The court dismissed each of Harless’ claims for failure to plausibly allege sufficient facts:

• ADA Claim: The court found that Harless did not adequately plead a disability as defined under the ADA. Although pregnancy-related complications can in some cases qualify as a disability, Harless did not allege a specific condition that substantially limited a major life activity. Her references to diminished milk supply and the City’s refusal to accommodate her request to work from home were not sufficient, particularly since she was able to pump at work and continued to perform her duties.
• PUMP Act Claim: Under the PUMP Act, an employee must give the employer formal notice of an inadequate lactation space and allow ten days for the employer to respond. The court found that Harless failed to plead facts showing she provided adequate notice as defined under the statute. Even if notice had been given, the City remedied the situation by providing a satisfactory pumping location within the required ten-day window.
• Title VII and PDA Claims: Harless alleged both hostile work environment and disparate treatment. The court found that she did not allege facts showing a workplace permeated by discriminatory hostility, nor did she provide sufficient detail to support her claim of disparate treatment. Her reference to male employees allegedly receiving special accommodations after criminal charges (such as DWI) was deemed too vague and speculative to support a plausible inference of sex-based discrimination.
• Constructive Discharge: The court held that Harless failed to allege that the City deliberately made her working conditions intolerable. While she may have been frustrated by the denial of her remote work request, her allegations did not rise to the level required to establish a claim of constructive discharge under federal law.

The court dismissed the case in its entirety, and entered judgment in favor of the City of Raleigh. Here is a copy of the decision: