In December 2009, a telemarketing company agreed to pay $60,000 to a Black former employee who EEOC alleged was immediately terminated following a diabetic episode at work in violation of Title VII and the ADA. In addition to paying $40,000 in monetary relief, the company must abide by the terms of a two-year consent decree resolving the case. judgment and injunction entered Oct. 9, 2012). The outcome of this 11th Circuit case holds important lessons for both workers and employers involved in alleged instances of discrimination and retaliation. $186,295 disability discrimination settlement for an applicant being denied employment for being blind. Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc.) disclosed on their resumes, could have served as proxies for race. In March 2020, Prewett Enterprises, Inc., doing business as B&P Enterprises, and Desoto Marine, LLC, rail services and disaster response companies, paid $250,000 and furnished other relief to settle a race harassment case brought by the EEOC. Ready Mix denies that racial harassment occurred at its worksites. The average court or jury awards are generally higher, around $100,000 and $300,000. 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. During the first month of 2020, EEOC has settled nineteen discrimination lawsuits. EEOC v. Hamilton Growers, Inc. d/b/a Southern Valley Fruit and Vegetable, Inc., No. The three-year settlement includes the company's agreement to not permit or maintain a hostile work environment based on race, not to discriminate or retaliate against any employees because of opposition to any unlawful practice, a posting of procedures for reporting discrimination and harassment, the submission of a report to EEOC regarding internal discrimination and harassment complaints, and the provision of a neutral letter of reference that states one of the affected employees left employment because he was laid off. EEOC v. Baby O's Restaurant dba Danny's Downtown, Civil Action No. 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. In August 2010, a temporary staffing agency with operations in five states admitted no wrongdoing but agreed to pay $585,000 to settle an EEOC suit alleging that the agency favored Hispanic workers over Black workers in hiring at a warehouse in Memphis, Tennessee. The EEOC claims that the company wanted to broaden the number of Hispanics at the store to better reflect its customer base. In addition to requiring a payment of damages, the consent decree settling the suit prohibits the furniture company from further retaliating against employees who complain about discrimination and requires the company to amend its current anti-discrimination policy to conform to EEOC policy and to provide four hours of anti-discrimination training to all Koper employees, including management personnel, on a biannual basis. In December 2009, EEOC won the $1 million judgment in a race and sex discrimination suit following a four-day trial. The supplier promoted complainant, but did not increase his base salary. EEOC officials said Danny's will also post notices at the work site, including EEOC on new allegations of race discrimination and retaliation during the two-year period. Thereafter, the parties agreed to settle the matter. 9, 2012). This resolution settles claims that the company subjected a class of Black employees to a hostile work environment that included racist graffiti and comments, that included the N-word and "boy." Specifically, the EEOC's lawsuit alleged that the company's foreman and other Emmert employees repeatedly harassed two employees, one African American and the other Caucasian, while working on the Odd Fellows Hall project in Salt Lake City. 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. The company withdrew its appeal on June 11, 2012 and agreed settle the case with the EEOC and plaintiff intervener for $1 million and court costs. The court then reversed summary judgment and remanded the case for trial. The company conducted an internal investigation, trained its employees, and terminated the company official to address the claims filed against it. The 39-month consent decree requires defendant to consider all female and Black applicants on the same basis as all other applicants, to engage in good faith efforts to increase recruitment of female and Black applicants, and to submit semiannual reports to EEOC that include applicant flow and hiring data by race and sex. The hotel also agreed to conduct antidiscrimination training and implement procedures to investigate discrimination complaints. The 24-month consent decree applies to all of Defendant's facilities in Georgia and include requirements that Defendant create and institute a nonretaliation policy, advise all employees that it will not retaliate against them for complaining about discrimination, and instruct all management and supervisory personnel about the terms of the decree and provide them with annual training on Title VII's equal employment obligations, including nonretaliation. Selected List of Press Releases Announcing Litigation Filings and Resolutions in Recent Race Harassment Cases. Choctaw has also been ordered to maintain records of discrimination complaints, provide annual reports to the EEOC, and post a notice to employees about the lawsuit that includes the EEOC's contact information. When the Black employees complained about the discriminatory treatment, the manager fired them. 1:07-cv-02964 (N.D. Ohio consent decree filed July 21, 2010). The EEOC filed suit against the company in September 2017, charging that Floyd's had engaged in race discrimination when a Floyd foreman repeatedly used the slur "n----r." After an African-American employee complained, the foreman angrily confronted him and rather than disciplining the harasser, the company transferred Woodall from his assignment as a backhoe operator to a less desirable job doing pick-and-shovel work in another state. Defendant did not announce the promotion until two months after Charging Party had begun the new job and did not issue Charging Party a cell telephone or a company e-mail address during his tenure in the position. The EEOC charged that Skanska failed to properly investigate complaints from the buck hoist operators that white employees subjected them to racially offensive comments and physical assault. In the lawsuit, EEOC alleged that the company subjected a Native American employee to continuous race-based harassment, which included co-workers calling him derogatory names and making insulting jokes about Native Americans over a period of years and then fired him when he continued to complain about the mistreatment. EEOC Accuses Va. Hospital System Of . On these bases, the EEOC found that a class of individuals were harassed and discriminated against because of their race, Black; their national origin, Hispanic; or their association with a Black or Hispanic employee in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. As part of the three-year consent decree, the company also is required to create clear, understandable anti-discrimination policies, require training for the owner and employees and provide regular reports to the EEOC for the next three years. In November 2019, On The Border Acquisitions, LLC, doing business as On The Border Mexican Grill & Cantina (OTB), paid $100,000 and provided other relief to settle an EEOC race harassment lawsuit. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Seasons 52 restaurant chain indicates that the more familiar pattern-or-practice of age discrimination . "The number of cases filed by the EEOC increased in a respectable climb back to pre-pandemic levels, forecasting a busy year ahead for the Commission and employers in FY . In its lawsuit, the EEOC charged that near Union City violated federal law by paying an African-American maintenance worker less than White counterparts and subjecting him to a hostile work environment. EEOC alleged that Hughes complained to management many times for more than a year regarding the harassment, and that when Day & Zimmerman finally arranged a meeting in response, it disciplined Hughes less than an hour later, and then fired him that same day, citing a false safety violation as a reason. In March 2011, EEOC filed a lawsuit alleging that a provider of preventive maintenance for residential and commercial heating and air conditioning systems, which has approximately 247 employees at 13 locations within Florida, Georgia, the District of Columbia, Northern Virginia and Maryland, violated federal law by discriminating against non-Caucasian employees based on their race when it paid them less than their Caucasian colleagues. EEOC v. Hamilton Growers, Inc., No. The EEOC has fought and won many landmark cases that have set the benchmark for anti-discrimination compensation in the U.S. In June 2007, the company hired a White male for the IT job. 2:13-cv-155 (S.D. 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. The settlement requires Baker Farms to stop discriminatory practices on the basis of national origin or race, refrain from automatically filling jobs with H-2A workers, or foreign nationals who receive a visa to fill temporary agricultural jobs, without first considering American workers and institute a formal anti-discrimination policy by Aug. 1, in addition to the monetary relief. 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. Tex. In March 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that the EEOC presented sufficient evidence that two African American railroad workers were disciplined more harshly for workplace rule violations than comparable White employees to raise a jury issue of race discrimination under Title VII. The EEOC found that the employees supervisor, an Asian woman, intentionally sabotaged complainant because she did not want a Hispanic woman to potentially serve as her supervisor. The complainant also alleged that the supervisor only wanted to promote Caucasian employees. Under the consent decree resolving this case, Taylor Shellfish has agreed to implement new policies, conduct extensive training for employees and management, post an anti-discrimination notice at the workplace and report compliance to the EEOC for a three-year period. According to the lawsuit, when the students met with the store manager, he briefly reviewed their applications and told them they were "not what he was looking for.". EEOC v. Sierra Restroom Solutions, LLC, Civ. Accordingly, the decision held that the Agency failed to take prompt action to meet its affirmative defense. There was no evidence that the term or any other racial epithet was used after this meeting. The district court dismissed the EEOC's case, ruling that Xerxes had "acted quickly and reasonably effectively to end" the harassment. The Commission's evidence included inculpatory tester evidence and expert testimony indicating that the names and voices of the Black applicants, as well as some of the organizational affiliations (e.g. 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. The company also will provide 2 hours of training annually to recruiters and HR personnel on Title VII, with a special emphasis on the discriminatory assignment of caregivers based on the racial preferences of clients.EEOC v. HiCare, Inc., dba Home Instead Senior Care, No. Under the agreement, Cabela's is required to appoint a diversity and inclusion director who will report directly to the company's chief administrative officer and set hiring goals designed to achieve parity in the hiring rates of white and minority job applicants. After one of the women complained, her hours were cut and she was eventually terminated. EEOC v. WRS Infrastructure and Env't Inc. d/b/a WRS Compass, No. EEOC v. The Laquila Grp., Inc., No. The 2-year consent decree prohibits the company from engaging in sex and race discrimination and retaliation at the three stores. Miss. The verdicts included $1.5 million in punitive damages $1.68 million in compensatory damages, and $130,550 in backpay. EEOC v. Battaglia Distrib. 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 aggrieved employees alleged that they were restricted to "back of the house" positions such as busboys and runners and refused promotions to "front of the house" positions such as captains, which instead went to Caucasian workers with less experience and seniority. At summary judgment, the district court denied in part the company's motion, stating that the company ignored both the extreme symbolism of a noose and that a reasonable jury could conclude that the worksite had at least some racial tension given the other nooses, threats, and racial epithets that each African-American employee experienced, and that the noose was intended to intimidate all African-Americans. In June 2010, EEOC and an Atlanta home builder settled for $378,500 a suit alleging the company unlawfully discriminated by assigning Black sales employees to neighborhoods based on race, failing to promote African Americans or women to management, and harassing an employee who complained. Wis. Mar. On January 15, 2011, the corporation asked that the damages be reduced because, inter alia, the plant where the victim had worked had closed. I am familiar with EEOC cases and have fought and won . In the lawsuit, EEOC alleged that Day & Zimmerman, through its foreman at the Poletti Power Plant in Astoria, Queens, N.Y., had subjected Carlos Hughes to physical and verbal racial harassment that included racial insults and derogatory stories referring to African Americans as stupid and incompetent, as well as frequently tripping Hughes, and once kicking him in the buttocks. The case, EEOC v. Wal-Mart Stores East, E.D. 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. When some employees complained, the supervisor allegedly replied the noose was "no big deal" and that workers who complained were "too sensitive." 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 August 2011, an Obion County producer of pork sausage products paid $60,000 and furnished other relief to settle a wage discrimination and racial harassment lawsuit filed by the EEOC. The new GM also berated the personnel coordinator for assisting the Black employee with his complaint and intensified his harassment of him until the employee resigned. 5:10-cv-01068-R (W.D.