[I guess Friday mornings are litigation update days, here on this particular blog. Grin.] I will wait a few days to describe it in more detail, but I’ll add the PDF file later on Friday. UPDATED — that link is live now. It seems that the single biggest denial of the plaintiff’s assertions is that the company says she was not given her first warning of unsatisfactory performance, only after the pregnancy was disclosed, as she alleged.
But the company does admit that it paid her a performance bonus of $8,000 shortly before the pregnancy disclosure. [Responsible public companies don’t usually pay performance bonuses to unsatisfactory performers, right?]
This one will be interesting. More detail, in a few days’ time.
Be careful out there, in the mean time.