eeoc discrimination cases won eeoc discrimination cases won

In January 2006, the Commission settled for $200,000 a case against Bally North America filed on behalf of a former manager of its Honolulu store who was harassed and fired due to her Asian race and Chinese national origin. EEOC had alleged that the company refused to hire a Black female applicant for a part-time customer service position, even after she was designated best qualified and had passed the requisite drug test. These practices led to all American workers receiving less pay than their foreign born counterparts. The judge faulted Noble Management LLC and New Indianapolis Hotels for failing to: (1) properly post notices; (2) properly train management employees; (3) keep employment records; (4) institute a new hiring procedure for housekeeping employees; and (5) reinstate three former housekeeping employees. Should Maritime reopen and reactivate its Maryland facilities, it shall be enjoined from creating or maintaining a hostile work environment and inferior economic terms and conditions of employment on the basis of national origin or race. . The alleged harassment included a manager's regular use of the "n-word" to refer to the Black employees and "sp*c" or "ignorant immigrants" to refer to the Hispanic employees. The employees complained to several supervisors and the Human Resources Department, and the offending employees were occasionally warned, but the hostile environment continued. In November 2010, a nationwide provider of engineering and janitorial services to commercial clients entered into a 4-year consent decree paying $90,000 in backpay and compensatory damages to settle the EEOC's claim that it discharged a building services engineer at a mall in Bethesda, Maryland in retaliation for complaining of race and sex discrimination. In August 2007, a San Jose body shop agreed to pay $45,000 to settle a sexual and racial harassment lawsuit filed by the EEOC, in which a male auto body technician of Chinese and Italian ancestry was taunted daily by his foreman with sexual comments, racial stereotypes and code words, including calling him "Bruce Lee." 09-30558 (5th Cir. Upon arrival, her employer realized she was Black and her supervisors gave her no direction and very few assignments despite her requests for work. Additionally, the EEOC alleged that an African-American telemarketer was paid less than a Caucasian telemarketer in a substantially similar job. The driver complained about the racial jokes and language to management but was suspended for 4 days following a dispute about a work assignment, and was discharged during the suspension. . According to the EEOC, the JATC violated the court's previous orders by summarily discharging the apprentice for alleged poor performance just days before he was to complete the program and be promoted to journeyman status. In this case, a jury found that two employees of Seattle City Light, a Vietnamese-American and an African-American, had been discriminated against and faced a hostile work environment because of their races . The agency also found that the company discriminated against black and Hispanic employees in the selection of lead positions at the St. Paul facility. EEOC v. Alliant Techsystems Inc., Case No. verdict filed Jan. 28, 2013). 11-6426 & 11-6427 (6th Cir.) Several individuals complained to management, but their complaints were minimized or ignored, the complaint alleged. According to the EEOC's complaint, Gonnella violated federal law by allegedly failing to respond adequately to a Black employee's complaints that he endured a pervasive pattern of disparaging racial comments made by his co-workers. The settlement also requires Hillshire to designate one employee to serve as a point-of-contact for those who feel they've been treated improperly and to punish workers with suspensions and even termination who are found "by reasonable evidence" to have engaged in racial bias or behavior related to it. Robinson reported the misconduct to several managers, but rather than taking corrective action, the director of used cars joined in the harassing conduct. Because the employee feared for his safety, he resigned. Additionally, he complained about plaintiff's request for a three-month maternity leave and refused to transfer back her job duties when she returned to work. In its view, the coroner's "lack of credibility, combined with his stated preference for employing African-Americans and his actions taken in furtherance of that goal, was sufficient for the EEOC to find that Linehan was subjected to race discrimination." In turn, officials at the U.S. The JATC imposed this severe sanction despite the apprentice satisfactorily completing virtually the entire eight-term program and despite his complaints about inadequate on-the-job training from biased contractors. After paying the $50,000, Danny's failed to comply with the rest of the decree. In May 2008, in New Capital Dimensions case the EEOC resolved a race discrimination and retaliation suit against a North Georgia restaurant chain for $135,000. 2:10-cv-03095 (D.N.J. Ky. Sep. 26, 2013). In July 2018, a Miami Beach hotel operator paid $2.5 million to settle an EEOC lawsuit that alleged the company had fired Black Haitian dishwashers who had complained about discrimination and replaced them with mostly light-skinned Hispanic workers. The plaintiff was able to file a lawsuit against this company with the help of the EEOC and was given a . Case Information Case Title. The record, however, showed that Complainant specifically listed relevant experience in all areas identified by the Selecting Official, and that the Selectee's application failed to establish relevant experience in two areas. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Tonya Battle, Charging Party, and Hurley Medical Center, Respondent," Detroit Field Office, September 26, 2013. In January 2010, an international investment management firm based in Malvern, Pennsylvania settled for $300,000 the EEOC's Title VII lawsuit, alleging that the firm failed to hire an African American female applicant for a financial planning manager position at defendant's Charlotte, North Carolina office because of her race. In December 2016, Crothall Services Group, Inc., a nationwide provider of janitorial and facilities management services, settled an EEOC lawsuit by adopting significant changes to its record-keeping practices related to the use of criminal background checks. 21-1499. The EEOC charged SFI, a fabricator and supplier of heavy-gauge steel and value-added products, with discharging three black employees on the same day because of their race. In accordance with the five-year consent decree, the company is enjoined from engaging in racial and religious discrimination or retaliation and must implement and enforce anti-discrimination policies, procedures, and training for all employees. The AJ also found that the Selecting Official's testimony about the Selectee's qualifications was not credible and was not supported by the documentation in the record. In June 2011, a district court ruled that the EEOC could proceed with its two Title VII cases alleging race, national origin, and religion discrimination by a meatpacking firm against a class of Black Somali Muslim workers at its facilities in Greeley, Colo., and Grand Island, Neb. In June 2013, the EEOC and J.B. Hunt Transport Inc. settled a race discrimination charge alleging the nationwide transportation company engaged in unlawful race discrimination by rejecting a Black truck driver applicant because of a prior criminal conviction unrelated to his prospective job duties. The company's other two interns, who were White, participated in projects and worked closely with supervisors. The consent decree also bolsters supervisor accountability and requires training on the requirements of Title VII for all managers, supervisors, and Human Resources personnel. In another recent California case, Kourtney Liggins sued the Archdiocese of Los Angeles for wrongful termination related to her pregnancy. Ark.Apr. The district court dismissed the EEOC's case, ruling that Xerxes had "acted quickly and reasonably effectively to end" the harassment. 1. The average court or jury awards are generally higher, around $100,000 and $300,000. 11-cv-11296 (E.D. The agreement also requires Cabela's to make equal employment opportunity compliance a component in the performance evaluation of managers and supervisors, to update its EEO policies, and provide annual training on EEO issues for all employees. EEOC v. Whirlpool Corp., No. According to the EEOC, the general manager of the Hampton Inn hotel advised her employees that she wanted to get "Mexicans" in who would clean better and complain less than her black housekeeping staff, even if the Hispanic hires were equally or less qualified than Black candidates. In a 2-1 decision partially overturning a federal trial court in Louisiana, the divided panel found that EEOC established a prima facie case of "work-rule" discrimination against Kansas City Southern Railway Co. on behalf of two of the four claimants. The decision then determined that the Agency erred finding that it took prompt action. In September 2019, a tire, wheels and auto service company, agreed to pay $55,000 and furnish other relief to settle a racial harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by the EEOC. 2440 Other Civil Rights EEOC alleged that initially the owner offered the Black employee money and the use of a limousine if the employee agreed not to testify in the discrimination case. EEOC had alleged that for the past eight years the restaurant engaged in racial and sexual harassment. The EEOC had charged that the company subjected Hispanic and Asian/Filipino employees to derogatory comments and slurs based on their race and/or national origin. & New Mercer Commons, Civ. That's our main finding after analyzing the outcomes of 683,419 discrimination cases filed with the U.S. In October 2012, a district court ruled that the EEOC proved that a construction site where a White supervisor regularly used racial slurs was objectively a hostile work environment for Black employees under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In February 2009, the Sixth Circuit published a favorable decision in a Title VII associational discrimination case in which the EEOC participated as amicus curiae. consent decree filed July 11, 2014). Instead, the company discharged the white driver later for an unrelated matter. An official website of the United States government. When the Black employee complained, no action was taken and the mistreatment continued. In April 2015, Local 25 of the Sheet Metal Workers' International Association and its associated apprenticeship school agreed to create a back pay fund for a group of minority sheet metal workers in partial settlement of race discrimination claims against the local union. Other Holmes employees used the term "n----r-rigging" while working there, and racist graffiti was evident both inside and outside portable toilets on the work site. Specifically, the Commission found that the discipline issued was disproportionate and lacked uniformity, and the record showed that other employees were not disciplined for engaging in similar conduct. EEOC claimed that Yellow and YRC also subjected Black employees to harsher discipline and closer scrutiny than their White counterparts and gave Black employees more difficult and time-consuming work assignments. According to the EEOC's lawsuit, the store manager of the Port Huron, Mich., location made derogatory, race-based comments to the only African American employee. In addition to the monetary relief, the new consent decree requires the developer to conduct extensive training on investigating discrimination complaints, including methods for proper documentation and unbiased assessment of witness credibility. In October 2007, the Commission decided that a federal agency had improperly dismissed a Black employee's racial harassment complaint for failure to state a claim. The court said the undisputed evidence also indicated that human resources manager told the company's employees during a safety meeting not to "nigger rig their jobs"; that company management was aware the worksite's portable toilets were covered with racist graffiti; and that other White supervisors and employees routinely used racial epithets, including an incident where a White supervisor commented regarding rap music being played in a van transporting employees to the worksite, "I'm not listening to this nigger jig." reopened after dismissal due to bankruptcy Mar. Under the two-year consent decree, the company is enjoined from engaging in retaliation, must instate a new policy on retaliation, and provide two hours of Title VII (including retaliation) training to all personnel in Little Rock. Employers paid more than $439 million to resolve U.S. The EEOC decided there was a pattern of racial discrimination at the company, and ordered Texaco to settle for $115million in cash for about 1500 minority employees. The manager who recommended the selectee, ignored complainant's qualifications and was reported to have previously told another African-American applicant that his "Black ass would never become a special agent." Wis. Mar. In addition to the $100,000 payment, Sears has agreed to take specified actions designed to prevent future discrimination, including the posting of anti-discrimination notices to employees, dissemination of its anti-discrimination policy and providing anti-discrimination training to employees. In January 2013, Emmert International agreed to settle an employment discrimination lawsuit filed by EEOC that charged the company harassed and retaliated against employees in violation of federal law. The decree enjoins the company from racial coding and prohibits race-based caregiver assignments. EEOC v. J&R Baker Farms LLC, et. Over the years, the EEOC has investigated numerous job discrimination complaints brought by young workers. Corey Bussey, Justin Jones and Christopher Evans worked in the meat department at GNT Foods. In April 2017, Sealy of Minnesota paid $175,000 to resolve a charge of racial harassment filed with the EEOC. The company will name an EEO officer to receive complaints of discrimination and retaliation, and starting in January 2011, and every 6 months thereafter, will report to EEOC and to defendant's vice president of national operations on complaints of discrimination and retaliation received from applicants and employees in Washington, DC, Maryland, and Virginia and the outcome. According to the EEOC's lawsuit, from February 2017 to at least July 2018, Treatment Centers subjected a Substance Abuse Counselor Allen Parson and two other African American employees were repeatedly and openly subjected to racial slurs by several clients of the facility and race-based counselor assignments to accommodate White clients' racial preferences not to be assigned to Black counselors. In March 2011, a television station settled a race and sex discrimination case filed by the EEOC for $45,000 and additional consideration. The three-year consent decree resolving the litigation contains significant injunctive relief requiring Bahama Breeze to update its EEO policies nationwide, provide anti-discrimination and diversity training to its managers and employees, and provide written reports regarding discrimination complaints. The suit further alleged that the company engaged in retaliation by firing one employee when he complained of racial harassment to the company president. Based on its investigation, the EEOC had found reasonable cause to believe that BBI discriminated against Illinois sales employees by offering them account and territory assignments that, when accepted, resulted in national origin or race discrimination, which violates Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964. Additionally, racist graffiti was written in portable toilets, with terms such as "coon"; "if u not White u not right"; "White power"; "KKK"; and "I love the Ku Klux Klan." In November 2006, the EEOC resolved a Title VII lawsuit alleging that defendant, a nationwide meat processing company, discriminated against Black maintenance department employees at its chicken processing plant in Ashland, Alabama, by subjecting them to a racially hostile work environment, which included a "Whites Only" sign on a bathroom in the maintenance department and a padlock on the bathroom door to which only White employees were given keys. In addition to monetary relief, the 18-month consent decree settling the lawsuit provides for training on employee rights under Title VII, and requires the company to maintain records of racial harassment complaints, provide annual reports to the EEOC, and post a notice to employees about the lawsuit that includes the EEOC's contact information. Other African-American employees were subjected to racial harassment, such as a White supervisor placing a hangman's noose on a piece of machinery. After being subjected to racial slurs and witnessing a supervisor display a noose with a black stuffed animal hanging from it, the employee complained. When the teen complained to the company president about the offensive remarks, the supervisor's son replied that he could not reprimand his father. The consent decree also requires the restaurant to provide training in equal employment opportunity laws for all of its employees and to appoint an Equal Employment Office Coordinator, who will be responsible for investigating discrimination complaints. In November 2006, the Commission found that a federal employee had been discriminated against based on his race (Asian/Pacific Islander) when he was not selected for the position of Social Insurance Specialist. Similar to discrimination based on race, age, gender, religion, and LGBTQ status, treating people with disabilities differently in the workplace is prohibited under: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The analyst was terminated allegedly because she left work 30 minutes early to beat the traffic. According to the lawsuit, the alleged victim applied and was interviewed several times for the job in May 2007. In April 2016, Lawler Foods, a large local bakery, agreed to settle for $1 million an EEOC race and national origin discrimination class case. Pursuant to the settlement, it is estimated that the union will pay approximately $12.7 million over the next five years and provide substantial remedial relief to partially resolve claims made against the union in 1991-2002. According to EEOC's lawsuit, Kimball applied for a vacant assembler job and interviewed with the company in January 2014. Group, Inc., Civil Action No. The agreement included some novel relief, such as: implementation of a new applicant tracking system; establishing an advisory committee focused on the recruitment, development and retention of minority groups; hiring of recruitment firms; developing new interview protocol training; establishing a mentoring program for recently hired minority employees; and updating job descriptions for all college manager positions to require as a job component the diversity of its workforce. The EEOC also charged that Hispanic and Filipino employees were told they had to be "White to get ahead" at the company. The other employee was forced to resign. In March 2014, a federal district court upheld a jury verdict in favor of the EEOC and ruled that Sparx Restaurant of Menomonie, Wis., must provide back pay with interest of more than $41,000 in addition to the jury's award of damages of $15,000 to a former employee who was fired in retaliation for complaining about a racist display in the workplace. Complainant indicated that the coworker who also was the president of the local union sent her an email with the subject line Asshole and stated the following: If [Complainant] wasnt such a N** who would run an[d] yell racism tomorrow. In addition to monetary relief, the company has agreed to provide anti-discrimination training to all of its employees and additional training on harassment and retaliation to all supervisors, managers and owners. In September 2013, a Kentucky coal mining company paid $245,000 to 19 total applicants and amend its hiring practices to settle a racial discrimination suit brought by the EEOC. They also alleged that they were subjected to racial insults and harassment when they complained. On appeal, the Fourth Circuit decided that a reasonable jury could find that the complaints by two claimants prior to February 2006 "were sufficient to place Xerxes on actual notice of racial slurs and pranks in the plant and that Xerxes' response was unreasonable." The company also agreed to fulfill notice-posting, training, and reporting requirements. [2] As the Sixth Circuit explained: "A White employee who is discharged because his child is biracial is discriminated against on the basis of his race, even though the root animus for the discrimination is a prejudice against the biracial child" because "the essence of the alleged discrimination . EEOC alleged that, instead of promoting one older Black employee, the company promoted a 28-year old Caucasian employee with seven months of experience and who did not meet the stated criteria for the position. The consent decree also requires the company to post a remedial notice for one year and to notify any potential successors of the consent decree. The Commission claimed that the company illegally granted placement preferences to Hispanic temps over African American temps. EEOC alleged that the engineer reported to his supervisor that the mall's operations manager was engaging in race discrimination and sexual harassment; the supervisor told the engineer to ignore the operations manager's conduct, and offered to relocate the engineer. The company will also provide employee training designed to prevent future discrimination and harassment on the job. 1:11-cv-04741 (E.D.N.Y. In September 2012, a Rosemont, Ill.-based food product distributor paid $165,000 and furnished other relief to settle a race discrimination lawsuit filed by the EEOC. In August 2016, an Illinois-based payroll and human resource services firm agreed to a $1.4 million settlement of charges that the company discriminated against Black and Hispanic job applicants and employees. King-Lar's policies and training materials also must reference the name and contact information for the designated employee as well as an 800 number and website that employees can use to make anonymous complaints. The company agreed to conduct EEO training and refrain from future acts of discrimination and retaliation. The decree also mandates training of employees and reporting to the EEOC any future complaints of race harassment. The same manager allegedly referred to one Black employee as "gorilla" while the employee was holding a banana. After the electrician complained about the harassment, he was terminated. The 5-year consent decree. 131 M Street, NE The 18-month consent decree enjoined DSW from future race discrimination and unlawful retaliation; required that DSW will provide training on federal laws and store policies prohibiting discrimination and retaliation and reporting regarding any internal complaints of alleged race discrimination or retaliation. The consent decree also requires Hillshire to implement anti-racism training and create a mechanism for employees at its existing plants to confidentially report instances of harassment, discrimination and retaliation. In September 2007, EEOC upheld an Administrative Judge's (AJ) default judgment in favor of complainant, a Staff Nurse Supervisor, who had alleged race discrimination when she was not selected for a Nurse Manager position. consent decree filed Dec. 1, 2014). 5:11CV00134 (W.D.N.C. The two year consent decree requires Regis to report the action it takes in response to any employee's complaint about discrimination and to post a notice to employees concerning their rights under federal, anti-discrimination laws. 1981, in which the EEOC filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiff. The Commission alleged that Whirlpool violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when it did nothing to stop a White male co-worker at a Whirlpool plant in LaVergne, Tenn., from harassing an African-American female employee because of her race and sex. In February 2008, a restaurant agreed to pay $165,000 to resolve a Title VII lawsuit EEOC brought on behalf of a dining manager who was Arab and Moroccan because he and an Arab waiter from Tunisia allegedly had been subjected to customer harassment based on race and national origin and then the manager was fired in retaliation for opposing the harassment. In February 2006, the Commission settled for $275,000 a Title VII lawsuit alleging that defendant, an aviation services company, subjected Charging Party to discriminatory terms and conditions of employment, discipline, and demotion based on race, Black. . The court also enjoined the company from discriminating on the basis of race or protected conduct in violation of Title VII. The jury found that the retailer failed to accommodate Marlo Spaeth, a longtime employee with Down syndrome, and then fired her in July 2015 because of her disability. The EEOC alleged that the Defendants, a health care management system and nursing home discriminated against African employees, specifically employees from Ethiopia and Sudan, when it terminated four personal care providers all on the same day, allegedly for failing to pass a newly instituted written exam. Defendants were also ordered to: (1) provide monthly reporting to the EEOC on compliance with the new hiring procedure, recordkeeping and posting; (2) pay fines for late reporting; (3) allow random inspections by the EEOC subject to a fine, for failure to grant access; (4) pay fines for failure to post, destroying records or failing to distribute employment applications; (5) provide EEOC with any requested employment records within 15 days of a request; (6) cease comingling medical records; and (7) train management employees. EEOC v. Dart Energy Corp., No. The EEOC further alleged that, shortly after she complained, she was discharged for supposedly making "false, defamatory, and malicious statements" about a supervisor. J.B. Hunt also reached a private settlement with the alleged discrimination victim, who filed an EEOC charge after being denied a job at J.B. Hunt's San Bernardino, Calif., facility in 2009. In February 2020, a Texas-based fiberglass conduit and strut manufacturer implemented extensive hiring reforms and paid $225,000 to settle allegations by the EEOC that it refused to hire non-Hispanic individuals as laborers. Skanska awarded a subcontract to C-1 to provide buck hoist operations for the construction site and thereafter supervised all C-1 employees while at the work site. 7:13-cv-01583 (D.S.C. In June 2011, Herzog Roofing, Inc., a Detroit Lakes, Minn., roofing company, agreed in a pre-suit settlement to pay $71,500 to seven Black, Hispanic, and American Indian employees to settle racial harassment and retaliation charges, alleging that the targeted employees were frequently subjected to racial epithets, racial jokes and hostile treatment by managers and coworkers and that complaints were ignored. The court affirmed the rest of the district court's judgment. In December 2010, the EEOC filed a race discrimination and retaliation suit against a real estate brokerage and management company alleging that the company refused to hire numerous Black applicants and then retaliated against other employees or former employees for opposing the race discrimination. [] The decree also requires the company to conduct anti-discrimination training at its Bishopville facility; post a notice about the settlement at that facility; implement a formal anti-discriminatory policy prohibiting racial discrimination; and report certain complaints of conduct that could constitute discrimination under Title VII to the EEOC for monitoring. The EEOC alleges that several weeks later, on May 17, 2008 the salon manager discharged the stylist in retaliation for her race-related complaint. In December 2006, a New York apple farm agreed to pay $100,000 to Jamaican migrant workers holding H-2B worker's visas who were allegedly subjected them to different terms and conditions of employment on the basis of their race (African-Caribbean), color (Black), and national origin (Jamaican). In March 2013, a not-for-profit developer of real estate, offices, and facilities around Grand Central Terminal in New York City paid $135,000 to settle a lawsuit filed by EEOC. EEOC complaints are handled by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the body responsible for investigating discrimination complaints based on religion, race, national origin, color, age, sex, and disability.