According to details in the lawsuit Hewett was denied reassignment to other vacant positions at Branch Banking and Trust where her hearing impairment would not affect her job performance. This was a reasonable accommodation and the company would have been better advised to have transfered her. In the current tight job market more companies believe they can treat workers as they wish and don't have to suffer any recourse. In this case Hewett asserted her rights and was victorious--good for her.

“Workers with disabilities are productive members of the American workforce,” said Lynette A. Barnes, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Charlotte District Office.

According to documents in the lawsuit and investigation by the EEOC determined that Tellez was fully qualified and capable of performing the essential functions of the job. This is a clear case of someone who can perform a job and is not given the chance because of someone else's poor decision. Tellez gets the final word and this case should send a signal to other employers not to discriminate against people with disabilities.

“All too frequently, the mainstream public, including employers, perceive people with disabilities through a filter of upon myths and stereotypes, instead of assessing each person on their own terms,” said EEOC Regional Attorney William Tamayo.

After getting a right to sue letter from the EEOC Turner filed a multi-count employment discrimination lawsuit in the Northern District of Illinois and a Judge in that court dismissed the complaint during a summary judgment hearing. Turner appealed and the Seventh Circuit upheld the district court Judge except on the sexual harassment count. In short, the sexual harassment case will continue.

The details of the sexual harassment claims include, once a customer spilled champagne on Turner's pants, and when he went to the bar area to find towels to dry himself off, Lake, his supervisor and former lover followed him there. She put her hands inside his pockets, grabbed his penis, and said, "You sure are soaked." In another instance Lake pressed her chest against him and asked, "Don't you miss me?" Lake approached Turner from behind and grabbed his buttocks. Lastly Lake saw Turner with his clothes off while he was changing into his work uniform and told him that she missed seeing him naked.

As is very typical in situations like this Jackson suffered financial hardship due to difficulties in finding a comparable job after she was fired. You can only imagion looking for work with one leg and having to tell a future employee you were fired because your boss didn't think you could perform your job in a wheelchair. Jackson not only suffered financially, but also through humiliation and loss of self-esteem.

“Attrell’s fired Ms. Jackson based on its own stereotypes about what a person who uses a wheelchair can and cannot do,” said A. Luis Lucero, Jr., director of the EEOC’s Seattle Field Office. “Ms. Jackson was not even given the opportunity to demonstrate her abilities to carry out her work functions using a chair. Such stereotyping harms people with disabilities, but it also hurts employers because they lose out on talented and qualified employees.”

This is a good example of what can happen to a company when they engage in discrimination. Had Sears made reasonable accomodations to workers the EEOC would not have gotten involved. Once the EEOC got involved and did some basic discovery, it releaved Sears had discriminated against many people. The average award to employees who are covered by this settlement is about $26,000. This was the largest ADA settlement in Illinois history.

“It is a satisfying day indeed when victims finally receive compensation for the wrongful discrimination they have endured,” said EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru. “

I see more cases like this in Illinois and this type of behavior still seems to be taking place in the workplace. It is very important for females to come forward when they encounter this type of sexual harassment and discrimination and contact an attorney. Many companies would rather sweep the issue under the rug once an employee comes forward and engage in retaliation rather than take the sexual harassment complaint seriously. As you can see from this case, it is a costly mistake for the company.

The final straw in the case came when Babin applied for an open makeup artist position at the store’s La Mer counter. Babin interviewed for the La Mer position and remarkabley on that same day, Saks sent Babin a letter stating that it did not have any positions appropriate for her background, even though Babin had more than 20-years of experience as a makeup artist. Saks eventually hired a make-up artist with no experience. Saks later admitted that Babin had been very qualified for the La Mer position. That statement proved damning to Saks position and they decided to settle.

Babin said “I was devastated when Saks fired me and then refused to hire me back. I loved my job and took a lot of pride and joy from working with people. The court’s decision in refusing to throw my case out means a great deal to me. I am grateful that I had the oppor­tunity to have my story heard. I feel that by this settlement, justice was served.”

The lawsuit was filed under the Americans With Disabilities Act ("ADA") which prohibits companies from discriminating against employees who have medical conditions which fall under the Act. Oldridge said “I think what they did was inappropriate and unethical." I couldn't agree more and obviously, the company realized what they did was wrong and settled this case. It was nice to see Oldridge stand up for himself and take on this company. There are many rights available to employees even in states like Illinois which are right to work states.

EEOC Regional Attorney Mary Jo O’Neill said, “People with disabilities are an untapped resource that employers should utilize."

In cases like this many people are unsure of their rights and are afraid to come forward and complain. Additionally, many times there is not clear evidence and the complaining person must rely on the investigative techniques of a good attorney. Getting a good attorney involved in the case early is the best way to protect your rights. In addition to the monetary settlement, Arbonne International must comply with prohibitions against further discrimination, train employees on discriminatory conduct and post and distribute a policy of non-discrimination.

EEOC Regional Attorney Laurie Young noted, “The ADA was passed to protect applicants like Lisa Wilson who are willing and able to work but are discriminated against by employers who may have false perceptions about disabilities.”

Along with paying $35,000 Hobby Lobby signed an injunction against discrimination and retaliation. Retaliation takes place when an employee is singled out because of filing a claim of discrimination or asking for a reasonable accomodation. In this case asking for a reasonable accomodation because of Tufts requirement to be in a wheel chair. As part of the settlement Hobby Lobby must revise its internal policies to clarify that persons with temporary impairments may be considered as persons with disabilities. Hobby Lobby must also conduct employee training on ADA issues and update its employee handbooks.

“This case might never have arisen if Hobby Lobby had clear policies to guide its management and human resources employees in determining whether to provide reasonable accommodations to employees whose impairments are long-lasting but not necessarily permanent,” said EEOC Regional Attorney John Hendrickson of the agency’s Chicago District.

Melanie Damian, an attorney for Balance, said the woman was never employed by the company. Although offered a position, the woman did not fill out the paperwork to be hired and did not take a drug test, causing the offer to be withdrawn. In addition, the company no longer does business in Chicago and didn’t have the number of employees needed to be covered by the law in this instance.

“We think the case is without any basis,” Damian said. The company will be responding to the EEOC’s complaint, she said.

Discovery showed that hundreds of employees who had taken workers' compensation leave were terminated by Sears without seriously considering reasonable accommodations to return them to work while they were on leave, or seriously considering whether a brief extension of their leave would make their return possible. All of this was in violation of the ADA.

"The era of employers being able to inflexibly and universally apply a leave limits policy without seriously considering the reasonable accommodation requirements of the ADA are over," EEOC attorney Hendrickson said.

They are also terminating employees if they reach the one-year mark on leave and that Jewel refused to allow qualified employees with disabilities assignment to temporary light duty jobs unless they were injured on the job. The case stemmed from an employee who suffered from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and severe allergic reactions to cosmetic fragrances

The EEOC also cites Jewel because it failed to stop the harassment of an employee disabled by a seizure disorder.

"According to the lawsuit Jewel told the man to go have a seizure and crawl on the floor.’”

The department rejected her requests to reduce her number of home visits, took more than a year to install an electric door so she could get through on a scooter, and rejected her request to work from home in bad weather. The department also did not make sure the sloped office parking lot was clear of snow, which meant Sturz fell on numerous occasions.

"A reasonable jury could find that plaintiff's conditions were objectively intolerable as a result of defendant's failure to accommodate her," Crabb wrote. "An employee should not have choose between her job and her health."

The state will pay Sturz, of Ellsworth, $171,000 in back pay and damages under the settlement. Her attorneys will receive $104,000.

According to the allegations UPS violated the Americans With Disabilities Act ("ADA") when Trudi Momsen, an administrative assistant at UPS, took a 12-month leave of absence from work when she began experiencing symptoms of what was later diagnosed as multiple sclerosis. She returned to work for a few weeks, but soon thereafter needed additional time off after experiencing what she believed to be negative side effects of her medication. Although Momsen could have returned to work after an additional two-week leave of absence, UPS fired her for exceeding its 12-month leave policy.

The EEOC filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Chicago after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement with UPS. The litigation, captioned EEOC v. United Parcel Service, Inc. (Civil Action No. 09-C-5291) and assigned to U.S. District Judge Robert M. Dow, Jr., seeks back pay and compensatory and punitive damages for Momsen and a class of disabled employees whom UPS similarly refused to accommodate, as well as an order barring future discrimination and other relief.

“This case should send a wake up call to Corporate America that violating the Americans With Disabilities Act will result in vigorous enforcement by the EEOC,” said Commission Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru. “The ADA has been the law of the land for nearly two decades now, and employers simply have no excuse for failing to abide by its provisions.”