Oct 1 (Reuters) - Walmart ( WMT ) was accused on Tuesday of

firing an employee at an Ohio store because she was pregnant,

which a nonprofit group said is likely part of a broader pattern

of discrimination by the largest private U.S. employer.

The National Women's Law Center filed complaints with the

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and its state-level

counterpart in Ohio on behalf of Corrissa Hernandez, who said

she was fired earlier this year after requesting a part-time

schedule and permission to sit while working as a cashier.

The NWLC said at least one other pregnant employee at the

Oberlin, Ohio, store where Hernandez worked faced similar

treatment, and urged the EEOC to investigate Walmart's ( WMT ) practices

across the country.

"We, and our client, are concerned that in addition to other

pregnant employees at the Oberlin store, workers at the many

other Walmart ( WMT ) stores nationwide may also be experiencing or be

vulnerable to discrimination," the NWLC said.

Bentonville, Arkansas-based Walmart ( WMT ) did not immediately

respond to a request for comment.

Hernandez in the complaint said she learned she was pregnant

after being hired by Walmart ( WMT ) in March. A month earlier, she had

miscarried while working in a job that required her to lift and

turn patients in hospital beds, according to the complaint.

Hernandez said she requested accommodations from the store's

lead cashier in April, and shortly after was told by a manager

that she was being fired because upper management was concerned

that she would call out or leave work early.

Walmart ( WMT ) previously excluded pregnancy from a list of medical

conditions for which it provided accommodations, but has said in

court filings in other cases that it changed that policy in 2017

in response to complaints and an EEOC probe.

The commission in a 2018 lawsuit accused Walmart ( WMT ) of

discriminating against pregnant workers at a Wisconsin warehouse

by denying their requests for restrictions on lifting and other

physical tasks. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2022

upheld a judge's dismissal of that case, saying Walmart's ( WMT )

accommodation policy was valid because it applied equally to all

workers.

Walmart ( WMT ) in 2020 had paid $14 million to settle a proposed

class action claiming it had routinely denied "light duty"

assignments to pregnant workers while granting them to injured

and disabled workers. The company denied wrongdoing.

A 2023 federal law, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act,

requires most employers to provide accommodations for pregnancy.

Previously, employers only had to grant accommodations to

pregnant workers that were already given to employees with other

medical conditions.

Hernandez's complaint accuses Walmart ( WMT ) of violating the PWFA,

the Americans with Disabilities Act, Title VII of the Civil

Rights Act of 1964, and comparable Ohio laws.

Read more:

Walmart ( WMT ) defeats U.S. agency's pregnancy discrimination

lawsuit

Wal-Mart faces another pregnancy bias claim at EEOC

Walmart's ( WMT ) $14 mln settlement of pregnancy bias claims

approved by judge

New pregnancy bias law broadly protects workers, US agency

says