The case study provides a great deal of details regarding pregnancy discrimination which could result similarly in a settlement as the case hyperlinked below. The linked case had some similarities in that the employee was fired after informing her employer of her pregnancy when just a few weeks prior she had received a good performance review. The difference between the cases however comes with the pretext for discrimination that was built by the employer in the case study. Pretext for discrimination is essentially the false narrative or justification for conducting some kind of adverse action against an employee, like how a single missed deadline due to Mavis having to deliver her child is what triggered Bigly into terminating her under the guise that she had consistently missed deadlines and was placed on a performance improvement plan previously in the year. In the case study it is clear that there is a great deal of evidence that could be used in this pregnancy discrimination case. Specifically, Bigly's termination letter and email offering a demotion displays his intent to follow through with discriminatory actions against Mavis. Furthermore, Carlee's emails to Mavis regarding her work can be used as evidence to show consistently praise-worthy work performance to negate any notion that Mavis was fired under the pretext of any lack in performance. Ultimately, the case study and the real case below should highlight the need to employ empathy and workplace ethics as a manager. Every employee has their own situations to deal with, so exercising even just a little bit of empathy can go a long way to ensuring coworkers feel safe at work. In both of these cases, being receptive and supportive of the pregnancy accommodations rather than the prioritizing the company's work, could have prevented the pregnancy discrimination. Managers and leaders should prioritize people, not just the profits