eeoc discrimination cases won eeoc discrimination cases won

In April 2007, a Pennsylvania hot dog franchise entered a consent decree with the EEOC agreeing to pay $7,500, to post a remedial notice in the restaurant, to semi-annually report on any future complaints alleging racial discrimination to the EEOC for a period of four years, and to provide Title VII training to all supervisors and managers. In November 2004, the Commission decided that, although racially charged comments were only made on one day, the nature of the comments, which included several racial slurs, was sufficiently severe to render work environment hostile. The company conducted an internal investigation, trained its employees, and terminated the company official to address the claims filed against it. The agreement applies to all ACM facilities and locations nationwide and has extra-territorial application to the extent permitted by Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The consent decree enjoins the restaurant from discriminating based on race in hiring or promotion into the bartender position, requires the restaurant to adopt a written anti-discrimination policy, provide Title VII training to all managers and supervisors, keep records related to any future complaints alleging racial discrimination in hiring or promotion, and submit reports to the EEOC. At the time of his hire, complainant was told that after 6 to 8 months, he would be promoted to account manager with an increase in his base salary. In May 2011, an IT service company entered a consent decree to pay $60,000 to an African-American employee who had allegedly been subjected to race discrimination and retaliation. 2:10-CV-13517 (E.D. After firing several of the Black employees, the store manager resigned in protest and the general manager fired the remaining African American employees himself. Of these, employees lost at least half of all cases. Tales of Age Discrimination in the Courts - AARP The company also must provide race and color discrimination training to all supervisory and management personnel in its IOB Unit and post a notice reinforcing the company's policies on Title VII. The case was settled through a consent decree, Rowe received $20,000 monetary relief. The EEOC had alleged that the Farms subjected American workers, most of whom were African American, to discrimination based on national origin and race at their Colquitt County location. 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." The EEOC said Maritime required Hispanic workers to perform personal tasks for the owner and managers, such as routinely assigning the female Hispanic class members to clean the houses of the owner or manager and assigning the male Hispanics to perform duties at their homes, such as landscaping, cleaning the pool, picking up dog excrement, painting or helping with moves. The chain was charged with refusing to hire African-American applicants and having managers who used racial slurs to refer to African-Americans. The EEOC alleged that the distributor's supervisors, including the Black employee's supervisor, used that restroom, yet the racist message remained for 30 days after he complained. The managers of the club used racial slurs when speaking of and to the doormen, forced them to work in the back of the club instead of at the entrance, and complained that "black music makes the club look bad." ) or https:// means youve safely connected to the .gov website. EEOC v. New Indianapolis Hotels LLC and Noble Management LLC, C.A. 27, 2012). All four of the selectees were White. Despite complaining to management, the African-American employee's compensation remained the same until she resigned. Wis., No. The company agreed to establish an effective anti-discrimination policy and to provide anti-discrimination training to its employees. "In the Matter of U.S. The company also will implement and disseminate to all employees a revised anti-harassment policy, and will also post a notice regarding the settlement. Real EEOC Cases. 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. The jury awarded $15,000 in compensatory damages and $50,000 in punitive damages to the rep. Following the determination, the County of Kauai entered into an over two-year conciliation agreement with the EEOC and the alleged victim. The agency also charged that the hotel paid lower wages to Black housekeepers, excluded Black housekeeping applicants on a systemic basis, and failed to maintain records required by law in violation of Title VII. In September 2019, Lexington Treatment Associates, a Delaware-based limited liability company that owns and operates methadone clinics in North Carolina, paid $110,000 and provided other relief to settle a racial harassment lawsuit brought by the EEOC. The agency was ordered to restore leave; pay complainant $50,000.00 in non-pecuniary compensatory damages and $6,944.00 in pecuniary compensatory damages; and pay $45,517.50 in attorney's fees and $786.39 for costs. The company must distribute copies of its revised written anti-harassment policy to all current and future employees and post the policy in the break room of its San Antonio manufacturing facility. In January 2017, Gonnella Baking Co. of Chicago, an established bread and rolls manufacturer, agreed to pay $30,000 to settle an EEOC lawsuit alleging racial harassment at the company's Aurora, Ill., facility. The harassment continued even after the employee reported the conduct. According to the EEOC's lawsuit, two Black carpenters were subjected to racial harassment during their employment by a White supervisor, who made racially derogatory comments including calling them "n----r." The supervisor also made a noose out of electrical wire and threatened to hang them, the EEOC charged. N.C. June 2016). 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. The loan processor applied for a promotion but was passed over for five lesser qualified Caucasian women aged between 23 and 30 who were based in various other branch offices, even though the processor had the best combination of relevant, objective scores that measured productivity, was "loan processor of the year" for 2007, the year immediately preceding the promotion decision, worked at the one of the largest and most profitable offices in the relevant district, and was the "go-to person" for the district on loan processing. In April 2011, a provider of operational support software and back office services deployed by cable and broadband operators worldwide agreed to pay $60,000 to settle a race and national origin discrimination lawsuit. Instead, the company discharged the white driver later for an unrelated matter. . Some of the logistics employees had been employed at BMW for several years, working for the various logistics services providers utilized by BMW since the opening of the plant in 1994. 1:13-cv-00473-WS-N (S.D. The AJ found that for approximately two and one-half years Black Health Technicians refused to comply with her orders while following the orders of African American nurses; that one Health Technician told complainant that she would not take orders from a White nurse; and that Technicians screamed, banged on doors, blocked complainant's exit when complainant asked for assistance. But it concluded that a jury would not find the lateral transfer had adversely affected Stuckey's employment since he suffered no reduction in pay, benefits, or responsibilities and it did not "alter his conditions of employment in a detrimental way." She was also subjected to unequal terms and conditions of employment. Here's Why Retaliation Claims Are Easier To Prove In Court Than 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 same manager allegedly referred to one Black employee as "gorilla" while the employee was holding a banana. The firm, however, offered the job to two less qualified White applicants -- the first declined and the second accepted. EEOC v. Lawlor Foods, Civil Action No. 4:11-cv-03425 (S.D. In September 2016, Resource Employment Solutions, LLC, a temporary staffing agency, will pay $435,000 to settle a race and national origin discrimination lawsuit brought by the EEOC. Selectee possessed the basic qualifications and had served as Acting Nurse Manager for a few months. The court "assume[d] for the sake of argument" that the evidence created a material factual dispute about whether AutoZone intentionally segregated its Black employee Kevin Stuckey because of his race when it transferred him out of a predominantly Hispanic-staffed store. The EEOC charged in its suit that Prestige's predecessor company, Airbus Alliance Inc., repeatedly instructed its human resource manager to not hire African-American applicants because they were "trouble" and "would sue the company." In March 2014, following the filing of the EEOC's contempt motion, Judge Lawrence ruled that the defendants violated the terms of the 2012 decree and ordered Defendants to pay more than $50,000 in back wages to the three former housekeepers whose reinstatement was delayed. The EEOC also had found that the company retaliated against the employee who brought the initial complaint by firing him after he reported the unlawful treatment. The facility claimed that it ceased the coding practice in 2008, but admitted that it continued to take client racial preferences into account in making caregiver assignments. The class of Black employees worked for C-1, Inc. Construction Company, a minority-owned subcontractor for Skanska. The agency found no discrimination and complainant appealed. Four nurses filed discrimination lawsuits after a Hurley staff member allegedly posted a note with the father's instructions. 3:12-CV-681-DPF-FKB (SD. The company's other two interns, who were White, participated in projects and worked closely with supervisors. The decision noted that the Agency took six months to engage in an internal investigation and issue the coworker a proposed 30-day suspension. consent decree filed 12/18/15) and Beaty et al v. The Hillshire Brands Co. et al., No. The lawsuit seeks back pay, compensatory and punitive damages, instatement or reinstatement as well as an injunction against future discrimination and retaliation. Pioneer management will receive additional training on its responsibilities under Title VII; be required to immediately report complaints to the human resources department; create a centralized system to track complaints; and be held accountable for failing to take appropriate action. In March 2008, a wholesaler book company settled an EEOC lawsuit alleging that it violated Title VII when the owner verbally harassed a White female employee after he learned she had biracial children such as stating that they were "too dark to be hers." In addition to the monetary relief, Holmes also committed to implement several affirmative steps to prevent and address race-based conduct on the worksite. According to the EEOC's suit, a Black maintenance mechanic at the Taylor Shellfish's Samish Bay Farm faced repeated demeaning comments about his race, including the use of the "N word," "spook" and "boy." In October 2007, the Commission obtained $2 million for approximately 50 claimants in this Title VII lawsuit alleging that defendant subjected employees in its three Illinois restaurant/gift stores to sex and race discrimination and retaliation, causing the constructive discharge of some employees. The Commission affirmed the AJ's finding of discrimination and ordered the retroactive promotion of complainant, back pay, compensatory damages ($75,000), attorney's fees, and other relief. In September 2007, a federal district court in Arizona granted a motion to dismiss the EEOC's race discrimination case against a northern Arizona hospital. The company is expressly enjoined from "utilizing the criminal background check guidelines" challenged by the EEOC in its lawsuit, the decree states. Additionally, the manager asked a Black hostess to "touch and suck his penis" and inappropriately grabbed her buttocks and breasts. The evidence of record established, however, that the "DAN" comment was unlikely used in complainant's presence as he could not recall who said it and he conceded it was not directed at him. According to EEOC, SFI replaced the black employees with white employees. Specifically, the lawsuit alleged that defendant's former general manager refused to hire Blacks and other non-Caucasian applicants into nursing support, food service, and housekeeping positions at an assisted living facility and coded the applications of minority applicants because she believed residents preferred White employees and did not want minorities to come into their rooms. In March 2008, a national restaurant chain entered a consent decree agreeing to pay $30,000 to resolve an EEOC case charging that the company gave African-American food servers inferior and lesser-paying job assignments by denying them assignments of larger parties with greater resulting tips and income, by denying them better paying assignments to banquets at the restaurant, and by failing on some occasions to give them assignments to any customers. The jury found that the retailer failed to accommodate Marlo Spaeth, a longtime employee with Down syndrome, and then fired her in July . The court, however, determined that Defendant was entitled to summary judgment on the hostile work environment claims brought on behalf of the White employees because injury must be personal and thus a White employee cannot sue for harassment of African-American employees that the White employee happened to see. Check DoNotPay's Ranking of EEOC Discrimination Cases Won 18, 2012). The district court decided that the companies were a single employer. On January 7, 2011, the district court dismissed the claimant's state law claim without prejudice '. The EEOC brought disparate impact and treatment claims based on race and national origin, and a retaliation claim for a white supervisor who stood up for the African workers and was fired several months before the test was instituted. In its lawsuit, the EEOC alleged that the franchise ordered the store manager to fire the African American employees because the student patrons did not like to be waited on by them. Ga. dismissal order filed Aug. 11, 2015). In September 2005, EEOC obtained a $34,000 default judgment on behalf of a then 19-year old Black former employee of a manufacturing plant in Illinois who alleged that he had been subjected to derogatory remarks and racial epithets, such as "what are you supposed to be, some kind of special nigger?" In addition to the damages payment, the settlement requires that the laboratory adopt a non-discrimination policy and complaint procedure and conduct anti-discrimination training for its staff. Finally, the company will provide written reports to the EEOC regarding any race discrimination or racial harassment complaints by employees. The company will also provide a neutral reference letter to the terminated employee. In March 2008, the Commission affirmed the AJ's finding of race (Native American) and national origin (Cherokee Nation) discrimination, where complainant had his life threatened by a client and the agency never took necessary actions to stop the harassment. The 6th . In July 2011, a global manufacturer and seller of chemical products in El Dorado, Ark., will pay $80,000 and furnish other relief to settle an EEOC lawsuit alleging the company engaged in race discrimination when it terminated Black employees based upon discriminatory and subjective evaluations. In addition to the monetary relief, the hotel must offer three of those employees their next available housekeeping positions and train any employees involved in the hiring process. According to the suit, supervisors and employees subjected an African American truck washer, the only black employee at the Milton facility for most of his employment, to racial epithets and insults despite the truck washer's complaints to management and then the company fired him on the same day that he complained. According to the EEOC's suit, an estimator and assistant project manager was subjected to derogatory comments from his supervisors, project manager and the company's owner on the basis of his national origin (Pakistani), religion (Islam), and color (brown). 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. EEOC v. Bloom at Belfair, No. Selected List of Pending and Resolved Cases Under the Age - US EEOC Court. The lawsuit indicated that the comments occurred almost daily and included things like telling the estimator he was the same color as human feces. The average wrongful termination settlement in North Carolina is between $5,000 - $90,000. The Black manager had worked for U-Haul for ten years as a reservation manager, assistant manager, general manager, area field manager and field relief manager, and held a bachelor's degree in business management as well as having received various awards for performance. The EEOC alleged the retaliation was so severe that one of the entertainers was forced to leave her employment. In November 2019, Janitorial Service Provider Diversified Maintenance Systems, LLC paid $750,000 and furnished significant equitable relief to settle a federal race discrimination, harassment and retaliation lawsuit. For workers, the ruling is a reminder to make certain of the completeness of all filings with the EEOC to avoid potential exhaustion problems. In July 2006, EEOC settled a Title VII action against a Dallas-based HIV service agency, in which four Black employees were allegedly racially harassed by the center's founder and former Executive Director, who is also African American. The EEOC charged in its lawsuit that the general manager who worked at both the Best Western Evergreen Inn (formerly La Quinta Federal Way) and Best Western Tacoma Dome persistently harassed and denigrated women, including those who were minorities and had strong religious beliefs, in violation of federal law. Furthermore, the foreman, who wore a swastika on his arm, stated that he had "cut an African from the belly to the neck" and that he "likes killing blacks and Mexicans." The awarded relief included punitive damages, compensatory damages, back pay, interest and tax-penalty offsets. The EEOC had alleged that the restaurant refused to hire an African American employee for a bartender position because of his race. According to the complaint, a foreman regularly subjected the employee to racially driven comments, gestures, and threats, including calling him "boy," telling him that that "whites run things," and threatening to physically harm the employee. EEOC v. KCSR, No. In September 2010, EEOC filed a racial harassment lawsuit against a cell phone installation and testing company, asserting that the company violated federal anti-discrimination laws when it subjected an African-American employee to severe and repeated harassment. The racial harassment included the supervisor calling him "little Asian" and "Chow" based on the Asian character in the movie "Hangover." Retaliation, EEOC, Settlement | JD Supra The manager hired a White candidate with more seniority. In April 2010, the EEOC settled its lawsuit against Professional Building Systems for $118,000 and significant non-monetary relief after it had identified at least 12 Black employees who had been subjected to racial harassment there. The three-year consent decree provides that the company also will take meaningful steps toward ensuring a work environment that is free from harassment by redistributing its anti-discrimination policy and providing annual anti-harassment training for certain human resources professionals and managers. The federal district court approved a two-year consent decree requiring the facility to provide training regarding anti-discrimination laws to all its employees; post a notice informing its employees of the consent decree; report to the EEOC any complaints of discrimination made by its employees; and take affirmative steps to recruit Asian nurses. EEOC v. Chapman Univ., No. Although complainant was a probationary employee, the record reflected that he worked at the same level or better than other full-time carriers. In accordance with the consent decree, the company must adopt, implement, and post a formal, written anti-discrimination policy, provide annual Title VII training for all managers and supervisors and report to the EEOC semi-annually on any instances where employees opposed unlawful employer practices. The agency was ordered to appoint complainant to the position of Assistant Chief Deputy U.S. In addition to the monetary relief, the company agreed to providing EEO training for its managers and supervisors the company and to submit a follow-up report on remedial measures being taken at the Concordville worksite. The EEOC lawsuit alleged that that Wells Fargo Financial failed to promote a highly qualified 47-year-old African-American loan processor on the basis of age and race. In August 2015, Target Corp. settled for $2.8 million an EEOC charge that the retailer's former tests for hiring for professional jobs discriminated against applicants based on race, sex and disability. Charges of discrimination filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") (and similar charges with state and local human relations agencies) are a critical first step in an employee's discrimination claim. even in the absence of the identification of an individual job applicant who was rejected because of his race." Following a hearing, the AJ found that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (Agency) discriminated against Complainant on the bases of race and age when it did not select him for a. 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 . In March 2007, the owners of a Louisiana motel agreed to pay $140,000 to charging party and three other claimants who alleged that the motel would not hire them for front-desk positions because they are African American. Of those 88 employees, 70 were Black. Ultimately, both Black employees were terminated, but the EEOC asserted that one of the employees was discharged for an infraction for which non-Black employees were not disciplined, while the other was discharged after relaying his intention to file a charge of discrimination to the company. The trade union, which is responsible for sheet metal journeypersons in northern New Jersey, allegedly discriminated against black and Hispanic journeypersons over a multi-year period in hiring and job assignments. 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 January 2007, EEOC settled a racial harassment lawsuit against AK Steel Corporation, a Fortune 500 company, for $600,000. Virginia (VA) wrongful termination settlements & cases The restaurant also must revise its discrimination complaint and investigation policies and disseminate them when they are approved by the EEOC as well as create a complaint procedure that is designed to encourage employees to come forward with incidents of racial discrimination. Pursuant to the consent decree settling the suit, the Hamilton Growers will exercise good faith in hiring and retaining qualified workers of American national origin and African-American workers for all farm work positions, including supervisory positions. Further, the agency's administrative investigation revealed that numerous Black female medical technicians at the hospital appear to have been required to perform assignments that their male Asian-Indian counterparts were allegedly not required to perform. In its complaint, the EEOC charged that the Chicago-area Italian restaurant chain violated federal civil rights laws by refusing to hire African-Americans because of their race. It also handles . In August 2006, the Commission settled this Title VII lawsuit alleging that since at least 1991, defendant, a manufacturer of precision metal-formed products and assemblies, failed to hire women and Blacks into laborer and machine operator positions at its plant because of their sex and race for $940,000. Erwin B. v. Dep't of Homeland Sec., EEOC Appeal No. L. No. These measures include: a comprehensive training regimen on discrimination (including racial discrimination and harassment); discussions of harassment in work site meetings on a monthly basis; the provision of an external ombudsman to receive and investigate complaints of discrimination or retaliation; and a detailed review and revision of Holmes' policies and procedures concerning protected-class discrimination and retaliation. The employer chose to voluntarily resolve this issue with the . The EEOC's suit also alleged that, about a week after the distributor finally removed the graffiti, a second message appeared, this time stating "KKK I hate N*****s." The EEOC alleged that this second message remained visible for over three months after the employee alerted the EEOC to the situation. Purported conduct of this nature violates Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. According to the lawsuit, the company's allegations that the Black journeyman electrician was in charge of a crew that damaged light fixtures is a pretext. In June 2005, an AJ found direct evidence of retaliation and circumstantial evidence of race discrimination where the agency's managers did not act on the Black complainant's plea for mail handling assistance for many months before the complainant injured himself. EEOC v. Pioneer Hotel, Inc. d/b/a Pioneer Hotel and Gambling Hall, Case No. According to the EEOC, the general manager of the Hampton Inn hotel located at 2311 North Shadeland Ave. advised her employees that she wanted to get "Mexicans" in who would clean better and complain less than her Black housekeeping staff.