EEOC v. L.A. In July 2008, a Chicago-based leading chemical manufacturer of high-quality surfactants, polymers, chemical specialties and cosmetic preservatives paid $175,000 to settle a class race discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed by the EEOC. EEOC asserted that the supervisor also allegedly told her that she really should be working in Harlem with her dark skin color and threatened to terminate her if she did not accept a demotion and a transfer to the Harlem store. EEOC v. McCormick & Schmick's Seafood Restaurants, Inc. and McCormick and Schmick Restaurant Corporation, No. In December 2009, a national restaurant chain settled a racial harassment lawsuit brought by EEOC for $1.26 million and significant remedial relief in a case alleging repeated racial harassment of 37 Black workers at the company's Beachwood, Ohio location. The three-year consent decree also requires the company, which has stores in Arkansas, Missouri, and Mississippi, to train all managers and supervisors on preventing race discrimination and retaliation; create job descriptions for manager and assistant manager positions that outline the qualifications for each position; develop a written promotion policy that will include the procedures by which employees will be notified of promotional opportunities; report assistant manager and manager vacancies, the name and race of all applicants for the position, and the name of the successful candidate; report the names of all African Americans who are either hired or promoted to manager or assistant manager positions; and report any complaints of race discrimination and describe its investigation in response to the complaint. All four of the selectees were White. 3:12-cv-00214 (E.D. 2:10-cv-02101(GMS) (D. Ariz. Nov. 25, 2014). In April 2004, a letter carrier prevailed in part on his federal sector complaint alleging employment discrimination based on race/national origin (Asian), disability (PTSD), and retaliation. Emmert's foreman and employees regularly used the "n-word," called the Black employee "boy," called the White employee a "n---- lover," and made racial jokes and comments. Lectric Chandler provided paralegal support at trial. The alleged harassment included directing threatening language and conduct at the Black laborer, such as saying that President Obama would be assassinated and showing him a swastika a White coworker had spray-painted on company equipment. EEOC claimed Scully also fired one of the three employees who filed EEOC charges complaining about the alleged harassment in retaliation for his protected activity. 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. It must also place a notation in the personnel file of both managers stating that they were the subject of a racial harassment complaint. 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. The EEOC ultimately found reasonable cause to believe that the county violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for the harassment to which the former attorney was subjected. The case was settled through a consent decree, Rowe received $20,000 monetary relief. According to the EEOC's lawsuit, the three African American men endured the store owner's daily use of racial slurs, one employee was slapped by the owner, and racially offensive posters of monkeys were prominently displayed in the workplace to humiliate the Black employees. Told that they needed to learn Spanish because they were in South Texas, the employees said that instead of addressing their complaints of discrimination, they were fired. In June 2016, the EEOC obtained a $350,000 settlement in its race discrimination lawsuit against defendant FAPS, Inc., a company located at Port Newark, N.J., involved in the processing for final sale of shipped automobiles. In addition, the company must also create and post an anti-discrimination policy in the restaurant, train its employees annually on Title VII requirements, and submit written reports regarding any future complaints alleging discrimination to the EEOC. Specifically, the Commission argued that the employer's application of its grooming policy to prohibit dreadlocks discriminates on the immutable trait of racial hair texture, violates the fundamental right to freedom of racial expression, and promotes unlawful racial stereotyping. WMN-09-cv-984 (D. Md. Instead, the staffing agency granted placement preferences to Hispanic workers and also retaliated against an African American employee who complained of the discrimination by refusing to place her and denying her a promotion. The agency also alleged that Hamilton Growers fired at least 16 African-American workers in 2009 based on race and/or national origin as their termination was coupled with race-based comments by a management official. It also decided, however, that a jury must determine if the three Black plaintiffs found the workplace subjectively offensive because, although their repeated complaints indicate they were offended, a jury must resolve factual issues raised by some co-workers' testimony that the plaintiffs actually did not seem bothered by the harasser's conduct. The company also will receive additional training on its responsibilities under Title VII, will have to immediately report complaints to the human resources department, and must create a centralized system to track complaints. At the conclusion of the bench trial, the judge entered a final judgment and awarded the employee a total of $1,073,261 in back pay, front pay and compensatory damages on December 21, 2009. She also asserted that her termination was racially motivated. In addition to management subjecting the Black supervisor to heightened and unfair scrutiny, the company moved his office to the basement, while White employees holding the same position were moved to higher floors. The decree enjoins the company from racial coding and prohibits race-based caregiver assignments. The court denied Dollar General's motion for summary judgment and the parties ultimately entered a two-year consent decree requiring Dollar General to maintain effective anti-discrimination policies, distribute the policies to all newly hired employees, and provide management training on anti-discrimination laws and other injunctive relief to ensure discrimination complaints are promptly reported and investigated. A class of African-American employees was subjected to racial harassment by co-workers when workers in a specific division were referred to as the "ghetto division," and were called derivations of "chocolate" or "chocolate delicious," conduct that went uncorrected. Pursuant to a three-year consent decree, the store also is required to provide training and ensure that it has appropriate anti-harassment policies in place. It also will conduct supervisor and employee training on discrimination and retaliation laws and establish a confidential process for people to submit discrimination and retaliation complaints. In this race-based action, an Indiana nursing home housed a White resident who did not want any assistance from Black health-care staff. Defendants moved for dismissal arguing (1) Africa is not a nation and so cannot serve as the basis of a national origin claim, (2) EEOC failed to allege any shared cultural or linguistic characteristics between the aggrieved individuals so they could not constitute a protected class; and (3) the EEOC's retaliation claim must be dismissed because EEOC failed to allege protected activity or the Defendants had knowledge of the white supervisor's motivations. EEOC v. River View Coal, LLC, No. In July 2010, Area Temps, Inc., a northeast Ohio temporary labor agency, agreed to pay $650,000 to resolve an EEOC lawsuit alleging that the company engaged in a systematic practice of considering and assigning (or rejecting) job applicants by race, sex, Hispanic national origin and age. EEOC v. KCSR, No. In August 2009, a Mississippi-based drilling company agreed to pay $50,000 to settle a Title VII lawsuit, alleging that four employees, three White and one Black, experienced racial harassment and retaliation while assigned to a remote drilling rig in Texas. Nine of the ten plaintiffs were Black employees. At work. 2:11-cv-01588-LRH-GWF (D. Nev. June 17, 2015). In August 2017, the EEOC affirmed an Administrative Judge's finding that the Department of Defense (Agency) had discriminated against Complainant when it did not select him for an Assistant Special Agent in Charge position. Consequently, despite promising the Black applicant he would be hired for a warehouse position, the company hired a less qualified White applicant. Cal. Two recent lawsuits filed by the U.S. even though the relevant union local is not a party to the suit. According to the EEOC lawsuit, a management trainee who was the only African-American employee at the store was subjected to a litany of unremedied racial comments including being called "spook," "boy," and "King Kong" and told that he had the "face of a janitor" from store management. 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. In its lawsuit, the EEOC said that Atsalis retaliated against a journeyman painter, who complained about the use of the "N-word" by his foreman, by not bringing him back to work for the 2008 work season. $186,295 disability discrimination settlement for an applicant being denied employment for being blind. 0120170218 (Dec. 21, 2017) . Pa. Jan. 6, 2012). In its lawsuit, the EEOC charged that Dollar General refused on at least three separate occasions to promote a Black employee to a vacant assistant store manager position at its Long Beach, Miss., store because of her race. In December 2011, a New York City retail-wholesale fish market agreed to pay $900,000 and institute anti-discrimination measures to settle an EEOC lawsuit charging it with creating a hostile work environment for Black and African male employees. 09-30558 (5th Cir. 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. 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. May 28, 2013). The AJ awarded 28 months of back pay and 24 months of from pay; lost benefits; compensatory damages of $120,000 for physical and mental pain and suffering; and approximately $40,000 in attorney's fees and costs. OFO rejected the Agencys explanation that the BQ scoring grid failed to consider years of nursing experience within specialty care clinics, noting that Selectee was considerably less experienced than Complainant. In February 2020, the EEOCs Office of Federal Operation (OFO) found that the Department of Veteran Affairs engaged in race and age discrimination when it did not select a Registered Nurse (RN) at the Murfreesboro VA Medical Center facility in Tennessee for the position of Nurse Manager, Specialty Clinics. In April 2008, a national video store entered a consent decree to pay $80,000 and to provide neutral references for the claimant in resolution of the EEOC's Title VII lawsuit against it. Additionally, EEOC alleged that an assistant store manager threatened to lynch him. One Rastafarian security officer objected to the supervisor's reaction and complained that he heard the supervisor had referred to the Rastafarians by the "N-word." When he refused, EEOC claimed the owner threatened the employees job and reduced his work hours. The three employees worked in the supply chain department at SFI and allegedly had no performance issues before their discharges. The EEOC's findings arose from its investigation of the apprentice's appeal of his dismissal, which he filed with the court-appointed special master who monitors Local 25 and its JATC pursuant to past judicial findings of race and national origin discrimination. The consent decree also enjoins The Original Hot Dog Shop from creating, tolerating, or fostering a hostile work environment based on race. According to the EEOC, the company has relied exclusively on "word-of-mouth recruitment practices" for field laborer positions, with the intent and effect of restricting the recruitment of Black and female applicants. Hurley also agreed to pay about $200,000 in March to settle a lawsuit filed by three nurses. The terms of the agreement were designed to enhance the College's commitment to the recruitment of African-American and Hispanics and to engage in meaningful monitoring of the College's efforts to reach its recruitment and hiring goals. 42 U.S.C. The company's motion to dismiss argued that the EEOC's complaint should be dismissed because it did not identify the victims of the alleged hiring discrimination. Valuing settlement offers. According to a complaint filed by the EEOC the same day as the proposed decree, Patterson-UTI had engaged in patterns or practices of hostile work environment harassment, disparate treatment discrimination and retaliation against Hispanic, Latino, Black, American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islander and other minority workers at its facilities in Colorado and other states. According to the EEOC's suit, the supervisor of the mailroom in NYU's Elmer Holmes Bobst Library regularly subjected his assistant, who is a native of Ghana, to slurs such as "monkey" and "gorilla," and made comments such as "go back to your cage," "go back to the jungle," and "do you want a banana?" However, the court vacated the $200,000 compensatory damages award as excessive and ruled that the EEOC and Linehan either could accept the remitted amount of $20,000 or hold a new hearing on the issue. In July 2006, EEOC reached a $100,000 settlement in its Title VII lawsuit against a Springfield, Missouri grocery chain alleging that a Black assistant manager was subjected to racially derogatory comments and epithets and was permanently suspended in retaliation for complaining about his store manager's racial harassment of him and the manager's sexual harassment of another worker. Even after the assistant alerted NYU that the supervisor had retaliated against him for complaining, such as by fabricating grounds for disciplining him, the university did not stop the harassment. In December 2010, a cosmetic laboratory settled an EEOC lawsuit charging discrimination based on race, color, national origin, and retaliation against a Black employee for $30,000. In October 2017, Reliable Inc., doing business as Reliable Nissan, agreed to settle charges of discrimination based on race, national origin, and religion, along with retaliation. A lock ( In 2017, almost 49% of all EEOC filings involved workplace retaliation. 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. The coworkers also made racially derogatory comments including using the racially offensive term "n----r-rigged," which was witnessed by the employees supervisor who took no action to stop it. Neil M. v. Dep't of Agric., EEOC Appeal No. The EEOC charged that Hospman's former chief executive officer ordered the housekeeping supervisor to terminate all of the housekeepers - all but one of whom were Black - because he did not work with "those kind of people." According to an EEOC lawsuit filed in September 2011 in a federal court in Pennsylvania, the executives of the cleaning company prohibited a White supervisor from hiring Black employees for a client in Concordsville, PA. In October 2007, a trial court determined that EEOC is entitled to a trial on its claim that a Toyota car dealership engaged in a wholesale elimination of Blacks in management when it demoted and ultimately terminated all of its African American managers because of their race. Selected List of Press Releases Announcing Litigation Filings and Resolutions in Recent Race Harassment Cases. In addition to monetary relief, the four-year consent decree required Pioneer Hotel must hire a consultant to help implement policies, procedures and training for all workers to prevent discrimination, harassment and retaliation. 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 . EEOC v. Columbine Health Sys. We are looking for people who may have been affected by the unlawful discrimination alleged in these suits. 3:12-CV-681-DPF-FKB (SD. In June 2016, Bloom at Belfair, a nursing home in Bluffton, South Carolina, paid $40,000 to settle an EEOC lawsuit alleging that the company discriminated against an African-American activities director when it fired her in September 2014 because of her race. The plaintiff was able to file a lawsuit against this company with the help of the EEOC and was given a . Aug. 16, 2011). In addition to the monetary damages to the three men, the two-year consent decree requires GNT Foods to provide employment discrimination training to its employees, to post its policies and anti-discrimination notice, and to comply with reporting and monitoring requirements. The employee ultimately was fired after he complained to the company's safety manager about the harassment. In June 2017, the EEOC investigated a restaurant operating over 100 facilities in the Eastern U.S. involving issues of hiring discrimination against African Americans. In May 2019, a Mississippi federal court jury yesterday returned a verdict in favor of the EEOC and five Black dancers who were subjected to egregious race discrimination while employed by Danny's of Jackson, LLC (Danny's), doing business as Danny's Downtown Cabaret, a Jackson, Mississippi night club. In February 2005, EEOC settled a retaliation case against Burger King for $65,000, on behalf of a Caucasian manager who was terminated after refusing to comply with a Black customer's preference that a "White boy" not make her sandwich. The 6th . In March 2020, G.N.T, Inc., doing business as GNT Foods, a grocery store located in East Point, Ga., paid $60,000 and furnished other relief to settle a racial harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by the EEOC. The Commission found that the agency's reasons were not sufficiently clear so that complainant could be given a fair opportunity to rebut such reasons. In June 2009, the EEOC overturned an AJ's finding of no discrimination in a Title VII race discrimination case. In enforcing Title VII's prohibition of race and color discrimination, the EEOC has filed, resolved, and adjudicated a number of cases since 1964. Additionally, nooses were displayed and portable toilets featured racially offensive graffiti with swastikas and "KKK" references at the job sites, EEOC alleged. In addition to the monetary claims fund, the four-year consent decree provides for extensive injunctive relief, including recruiting and hiring of blacks and non-Hispanic job applicants, and training for managers. Okla. Nov. 4, 2011). The consent decree also includes provisions for equal employment opportunity training, reporting, and posting of anti-discrimination notices. The court also found that a reasonable jury could decide that Defendant failed to exercise reasonable care to prevent or remedy the harassment since it did not distribute its written policy forbidding racial harassment to its employees, post it at the job-site, or train the employees about what constitutes harassment and how to report it.