Surprise Arrival. Gracie was surprised and pleased to find she was pregnant. She worked as a server at Good Food and was aware that Groucho, her employer, had allowed employees who were ill for reasons that were not work related to take paid time off. For example, her friend Craig was off with pay for two months after suffering a mild heart attack, and her friend Bonnie was off work for three months when she ran her personal watercraft into a dock and broke her leg. Gracie told her employer Groucho about her pregnancy. He very angrily told her that pregnancy was completely voluntary, that he was not paying her a dime when she was off work, and that she would be lucky if he even allowed her to continue working at all because she would not be as cute when she gained weight. He also said that he serves families, and he does not want the kids to ask embarrassing questions of their parents regarding Gracie's condition. Gracie was very angry and threatened to sue. Groucho told her, however, that he had business law back in $1980$ and that discrimination based on pregnancy is not even covered by Title VII. The employee handbook did not address the issue. Which of the following is true regarding Groucho's comment that pregnancy$-$based discrimination is not covered by Title VII?

Multiple Choice

$$ He is incorrect, because' Title VII was amended in $1980$ to include pregnancy within its protection.

$$ He is correct that Title VII does not prohibit pregnancy$-$based discrimination, but Title IV does prohibit it$.$

$$ He is incorrect, because Title VII was amended in $1987$ to include pregnancy within its protection.

$$ He is incorrect, because Title VII was amended in $1997$ to include pregnancy within its protection.

$$ He is correct since federal law does not prohibit pregnancy$-$based discrimination.