The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has settled a lawsuit against a steel-fabrication company, Moore & Morford, Inc. The EEOC had previously filed a lawsuit against the company alleging harassment based on her sex and retaliation for her complaints of harassment. The EEOC’s lawsuit claimed that Moore & Morford subjected one of its female employees to a hostile work environment based on her sex. Male employees of the company regularly used offensive and derogatory terms to the female employee that were based on her sex, and they told her that “women don’t belong on the floor.” The female employee complained to the owners, but that only resulted in the company’s foreman treating her even worse (grabbing her by her shirt collar, denying her tools, and making her clean feces in the women’s bathroom). Due to the continued harassment, she filed a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC, and shortly after filing the Charge, the company terminated her employment. This alleged conduct is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits harassment based on sex and retaliation for complaints of such harassment. See EEOC v. Moore & Morford, Inc., No. 2:20-cv-00892 (W.D. Pa.).
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission recently reached a settlement with a company that the EEOC claimed had harassed one of its employees so badly that it forced him to quit. The employee, a sales consultant, was allegedly subjected to constant verbal harassment based on race, sexual orientation, and a disability. This alleged conduct is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination and harassment on the basis of sex (including sexual orientation) and race. The alleged conduct also violations the Americans with Disabilities Act, which prohibits discrimination and harassment on the basis of disability. See EEOC v. Baccarat, Inc., No. 1:20-CV-02918 (S.D.N.Y.).
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has reached a settlement with St. Vincent Hospital in a lawsuit where the EEOC alleged that the hospital discriminated against an employee because of a disability and then retaliated after this employee complained of discrimination. The lawsuit claimed that one of St. Vincent Hospital’s employees, Asheley Coriz, was subjected to a hostile work environment by her supervisor because Ms. Coriz is deaf. The lawsuit further claimed that Ms. Coriz was not granted reasonable accommodations, and that St. Vincent then fired Ms. Coriz after she complained about St. Vincent’s failure to grant her requested reasonable accommodations and her supervisor’s discriminatory conduct. This alleged conduct is a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The ADA protects employees from discrimination and retaliation due to a disability. See EEOC v. St. Vincent Hospital, No. 1:19-cv-00764 (D.N.M.).
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission recently settled a lawsuit that it had filed last year, in which the EEOC had alleged that a company had discriminated against multiple employees due to their religion and national origin and retaliated against these employees after they complained about the hostile work environment that Service Caster Corporation created. The EEOC’s lawsuit claimed that Service Caster subjected three of its Puerto Rican employees to a hostile work environment because of the Puerto Rican national origin and also because of their sincerely held religious beliefs, Pentecostal. Specifically, the EEOC asserted that the Plant Manager regularly made derogatory, insulting, and negative remarks about the employees’ national origin and called their religion a cult. The employees complained to the owner, but the harassment continued, and Service Caster eventually retaliated by reducing their hours and responsibility and eventually terminating their employment. This alleged conduct is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination and harassment based on an employee’s national origin and religion. See EEOC v. Service Caster Corp., No. 5:19-cv-04525 (E.D. Pa.).
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Thompson Construction Group, Inc., for allegedly firing a black employee due to his race. The EEOC’s lawsuit claims that Thompson hired this employee to work as a pipefitter foreman to oversee a crew of pipe workers. Just a few months after he was hired, a white subordinate employee made derogatory and offensive comments to this foreman based on his race. Instead of terminating the Caucasian employee, Thompson Construction fired the African American pipefitter foreman. The EEOC is alleging that the pipefitter foreman was fired because of his race. This alleged conduct is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race. See EEOC v. Thompson Construction Group, Inc., No. 1:20-cv-00406 (M.D.N.C.).
The EEOC recently sued a chain of fast food restaurants, Smashburger, for allegedly subjecting an employee to racial harassment. The EEOC’s lawsuit claims that one of its black employees was subjected to a racially hostile work environment by a general manager who made repeated offensive and demeaning racial comments about the black employee to his fiancée (another employee at the restaurant), such as making suggestions that she should break up with her fiancé because he is black. The lawsuit further alleges that the company took nearly a year after complaints started before it started conducting a serious investigation. This alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination and harassment against employees because of their race. See EEOC V. Icon Burger Acquisition, LLC d/b/a Smashburger, No. 2:20-cv-01601 (E.D.N.Y.).
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity recently filed a lawsuit against a special events company that assists with weddings and other corporate events, Great Rentals and Events, LLC. The EEOC claims that this company subjected one of its female employees to a hostile work environment and then terminated her in retaliation for complaining about this hostile work environment. The EEOC’s lawsuit alleges that the company’s owner made repeated demeaning comments about women, such as calling women “worthless because they have kids” and referring to female employees as “little girls.” A female employee complained to human resources about these comments, and the EEOC claims that she was fired in retaliation. This alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits sex discrimination, sexual harassment, and retaliation for complaints of sex discrimination or sexual harassment. See EEOC v. Great Rentals and Events, LLC, No. 5:20-cv-448 (W.D. Tex.).
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission settled a lawsuit against Porous Materials, Inc., in which the EEOC alleged that the company had harassed employees because of their race, sex, and national origin. The EEOC’s lawsuit claims that the company subjected its employees to sexism, racism, and national origin discrimination by a manager’s use of racial slurs, references to foreign-born employees as “terrorists,” and racist remarks to the company’s only black employee that involved a noose. This manager also complained that immigrants stole American jobs and told immigrant employees to leave America. The lawsuit also alleged that the manager made discriminatory comments about women and said that women could not perform a “man’s job.” This alleged conduct is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits race discrimination, national origin discrimination, and sex discrimination as well as harassment. See EEOC v. Porous Materials, Inc., No. 3:18-cv-01099 (N.D.N.Y.).
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission settled a lawsuit in which the EEOC claimed that El Tio Tex-Mex Grill had subjected an employee to offensive and inappropriate homophobic slurs and taunts regarding his sexual orientation. The lawsuit further alleged that these comments were also directed at one of the server’s friends, a busser who was straight, because of their friendship. The busser and server reported the harassment to their managers on multiple occasions, but the company took no action to stop the harassment, which allowed it to continue. The alleged conduct is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits sex discrimination and sexual harassment. See EEOC v. Mejia Corp., No. 1:18-cv-01226 (E.D. Va.).
The EEOC reached a settlement with an oil and gas company, Murex. The EEOC claimed that Murex subjected one of its African-American employees to a racially hostile work environment. The EEOC’s lawsuit alleges that Murex’s employee, Derrick Jenkins, endured racial harassment from his co-workers during his employment in 2014. Jenkins’ co-workers called him offensive racial slurs such as “spade,” “spook,” and “Buckwheat.” In addition, the co-workers used other inappropriate racial terms such as “n***** rigged.” Jenkins supervisor observed the racial harassment but did nothing to stop it. In addition, the EEOC also alleged that another African-American employee for Murex complained to an executive at the company, but that that executive also did nothing to stop the harassment. Such alleged conduct is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Discrimination or harassment on the basis of race is illegal. See EEOC v. Murex Petroleum Corp., No. 1:18-cv-00169 (D.N.D.).
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reached a settlement with MPW Industrial Services in a lawsuit in which the EEOC alleged that MPW discriminated against two African American employees because of their race. The EEOC’s lawsuit alleged that MPW had subjected the African American employees to racial harassment including racial epithets, racist comments, racist jokes, hangman’s nooses, and had an alleged KKK meeting at the work location. Such alleged conduct is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. See EEOC v. MPW Industrial Services, Inc., No. 1:18-cv-00063 (S.D. Ohio).
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit against a barbecue restaurant alleging that it subjected an African-American employee to a racially hostile work environment, which resulted in the employee’s constructive discharge. The EEOC’s lawsuit alleges that Shana Knox worked in the carryout area of the restaurant for about ten months. While working, a white co-worker made numerous offensive, inappropriate, and racist comments to Knox. Knox complained to management, but the comments and harassment did not stop. The lawsuit further alleges that Knox was constructively discharged after the white co-worker threw barbecue sauce at Knox and called her the N-word. Such alleged conduct is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which protects employees from a racially hostile work environment. See EEOC v. Joe's Old Fashioned Bar-B-Que, Inc., No. 5:18-cv-000180 (W.D.N.C.).
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reached a $25,000 settlement with Floyd’s Equipment, which the EEOC alleged had discriminated and retaliated against an African American employee due to his race. The EEOC alleged that the company’s foreman repeatedly used the “n word” at work. One of Floyd’s African American employees complained about the racial slur and its use by the foreman. After the complaint was made, the foreman confronted him angrily, and the company then transferred the employee to a job in a different state performing work with a shovel (instead of a backhoe). Eventually, Floyd’s terminated the employee who had complained. Such alleged conduct is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII protects employees against discrimination based on numerous protected classes, including race. See EEOC v. Floyd's Equipment, Inc., No. 1:17-cv-00175 (E.D. Mo.).
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission recently filed a lawsuit against Aaron’s, Inc., a nationwide store of rent-to-own products. The lawsuit alleges that certain supervisors racially harassed African American employees by openly and regularly used offensive racial slurs including “n*****” and “monkey." The Complaint further claims that African Americans were treated worse than non-African American employees by being given more difficult tasks than others. Discrimination on the basis of an employee’s race is illegal pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. See EEOC v. Aaron's, Inc., No. 1:17-cv-07273 (E.D.N.Y.).
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission recently announced that Reliable Nissan agreed to settle charges of discrimination alleging race discrimination, national origin discrimination, religious discrimination, and retaliation. Employees claimed that two managers from the company repeatedly used the “n-word” during a meeting and used derogatory terms to refer to African-American, Native American, Muslim, and Hispanic employees. The employees alleged that the managers also made offensive jokes about the religious practices of Muslim and Native American employees, and that the workplace included offensive pictures towards minority employees. The employees further claimed that the managers used offensive terms including “n*****,” “drunken Indians,” and “redskins.” The alleged conduct is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Discrimination against employees on the basis of their race, religion, or national origin is illegal. It is also illegal to retaliate against employees who complain about such discrimination. The EEOC reported that Reliable Nissan agreed to pay $205,000 total to three employees who filed allegations of discrimination. See https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/10-11-17.cfm
Employer Calling Employees Ignorant, Lazy or Stupid Because Of Their Country Creates a Hostile Work Environment
The EEOC recently filed a lawsuit against Glaser Organic Farms, alleging that Glaser subjected its kitchen employees to a hostile work environment because of the employees’ national origin and race. The lawsuit also included a retaliation charge as a result of Glaser terminating an employee for filling a discrimination charge with the EEOC. The EEOC’s suit alleges that a kitchen manager created a hostile work environment for Hispanic employees by making disparaging comments such as “You Mexicans are ignorant, “Mexicans are lazy,” and “Mexicans are stupid.” Glaser fired the employee who filed a discrimination charge with the EEOC. This conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race and national origin, and prohibits an employer from retaliating against employees who oppose this type of discrimination. See EEOC v. Glaser, No. 1:15-cv-23642 (S.D. Fla.).