Tiara Stewart has filed a lawsuit against her former employer, alleging pregnancy discrimination and retaliation. The complaint was lodged in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on February 7, 2025, targeting Merchant Service Midwest, Inc., doing business as Velocity Merchant Services.
The case centers around allegations that Stewart faced discriminatory treatment and was wrongfully terminated due to her pregnancy. Stewart, who worked as a Small Business Consultant for the company from September 2024 until January 8, 2025, claims she was subjected to a hostile work environment and treated differently compared to non-pregnant employees. According to the complaint, Stewart took a leave of absence starting December 15, 2024, due to pregnancy complications—a request she argues should have been accommodated under both Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) of 2023.
Despite being scheduled to return on January 13, 2025, Stewart alleges she was informed by her employer that she could not resume work. Instead of accommodating her medical leave related to pregnancy complications, Stewart contends that her position was terminated. She recalls being told to check back in a month or two for any available positions—an action she interprets as indicative of discrimination based on her sex and pregnancy status.
Stewart's complaint highlights several alleged violations: sex-based discrimination under Title VII; failure to accommodate under the PWFA; and retaliatory actions following her requests for reasonable accommodations due to her pregnancy. She asserts that these actions were taken despite meeting or exceeding performance expectations throughout her employment.
In seeking redress from the court, Stewart demands various forms of relief including back pay with interest, compensatory and punitive damages, attorney fees and costs, pre-judgment interest if applicable, and any other relief deemed appropriate by the court. Her legal representation is provided by Chad W. Eisenback from Sulaiman Law Group Ltd., while no defense attorneys are listed in the document. The case is identified as Case No. 1:25-cv-01353.