The case I decided to research is Dollar General's lawsuit alleging pregnancy discrimination. This case was recently settled, so there isn't much information yet. The lawsuit claimed that the retailer unlawfully fired a sales associate immediately after she informed her store manager of her pregnancy. As part of the settlement, Dollar General will also revise its anti-discrimination policies, provide annual training on Title VII to its managers, and allow the EEOC to monitor discrimination complaints. A "pretext for discrimination" refers to a false reason or cover story provided by an employer or organization to justify a discriminatory action. In other words, it's an excuse used to hide the real, unlawful motive for treating someone unfavorably, such as firing or not hiring them based on race, gender, pregnancy, or other protected characteristics. In the Dollar General case, possible evidence of discrimination includes the immediate termination of the sales associate after she disclosed her pregnancy and the store manager's refusal to allow her to return to work despite her assurance that she could continue working. Additionally, the reason provided for her termination, "health reasons," without a valid basis, suggests it was a pretext for discrimination based on her pregnancy. A key takeaway for management is the importance of providing training on anti-discrimination laws, especially regarding pregnancy. Managers should be educated on the legal rights of pregnant employees and the appropriate ways to address any work-related concerns that involve pregnancy, ensuring that discriminatory biases or misconceptions do not influence decisions. This proactive approach can help prevent discriminatory practices and promote a more inclusive and lawful workplace environment