<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>Illinois Sexual Harassment Attorney Blog</title>
      <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/</link>
      <description>Published by Peter M. LaSorsa   </description>
      <language>en</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2010</copyright>
      <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 07:52:44 -0600</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/?v=3.33</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

            <item>
         <title>Union Settles Retaliation Lawsuit For $80,000</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>The Maryland Classified Employees Association ("<a href="http://www.mcea.org/"target="_blank">MCEA</a>") union pays $80,000 to settle a <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093473.html"target="_blank">retaliation</a> lawsuit.  The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Oppor­tunity Commission ("<a href="http://EEOC.gov"target="_blank">EEOC</a>") on behalf of Gail Tate-Buntin.  According to the lawsuit Buntin was involved in an EEOC investigation based on allegations of another employee, Michele Handy.  Buntin claims she suffered retaliation because she was truthful during the investigation and the company did not like what she witnessed.  </p>

<p>According to the lawsuit MCEA denied a promotion to Handy and subjected her to  discriminatory terms and conditions of employment because she filed a <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093268.html"target="_blank">discrimin­ation</a> complaint with the EEOC.  This is a classic case of an employee minding her own business and being brought into an investigation and then having something negative happen to her. Employers would be wise to look at this case and develope employment practices that don't violate the rights of its' employees.</p>

<blockquote>“Title VII depends for its enforcement upon  the cooperation of employees who are willing to oppose or report employment  discrimination,” said EEOC Acting Regional Attorney Debra M. Lawrence.</blockquote>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2010/04/union_settles_retaliation_laws.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2010/04/union_settles_retaliation_laws.html</guid>
         <category>Retaliation</category>
         <pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 07:52:44 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Firefigher Settles Employment Discrimination Lawsuit For $150,000</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Steven Napolitano agreed to settle his <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093268.html"target="_blank">employment discrimination </a>lawsuit with the <a href="http://www.eppleyairfield.com/"target="_blank">Omaha Airport Authority</a> for $150,000 and as part of the agreement they must reinstate him.  In the lawsuit Napolitano alleged he was fired after refusing to support the airport fire chief's claims against Napolitano's captain. The main issue was that the captain was accused of falsifying training records for Napolitano and other firefighters.</p>

<p>It is very tough to assert your rights in the workplace.  Napolitano in this case was not afraid to stand up to management and as a result he has a nice payday plus he has his job as a firefighter back.  Employment discrimination is a very broad term and covers many different types of discrimination.  There are many remedies available for employees who believe they have been discriminated against.  There are also very strict time limits, also called statutes of limitation that must be followed.  It is very important to act quickly to protect your rights and available remedies.</p>

<blockquote>Napolitano also told the chief that “the firefighters would not be intimidated into making false statements.”</blockquote>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2010/03/firefigher_settles_employment.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2010/03/firefigher_settles_employment.html</guid>
         <category>Employment Discrimination</category>
         <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 05:40:27 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Outback Steakhouse Pays $19 Million To Settle Discrimination Lawsuit</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Outback Steakhouse settled a <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093479.html"target="_blank">gender discrimination </a>lawsuit with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("<a href="http://EEOC.gov"target="_blank">EEOC</a>") for $19 million.  The lawsuit was filed on behalf of over a thousand female employees in restaurants throughout the country.  The lawsuit alleges that Outback Steakhouse unlawfully discriminated against female employees by treating the females different from male employees.  In the legal industry this is known as discrimination based on terms and conditions of employment.  The female employees were denied equal opportunities for advancement within the company. </p>

<p>When this happens to female employees it is known as the <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093278.html"target="_blank">glass ceiling</a>.  The glass ceiling at a corporation takes place when females cannot get promoted to the higher-level profit-sharing management positions within an organization.  In this case the female employees at <a href="http://www.outback.com/"target="_blank">Outback Steakhouse </a>were not able to advance into upper management where the lucrative jobs are. In this particular case, the EEOC claimed females were denied favorable job assignments, including kitchen management experience.  This is important because without experience in those positions employees were unable to make it into top management.  If you look at the management profile of most corporations, they are still made up of white males.  </p>

<blockquote>“There are still too many glass ceilings left to shatter in workplaces throughout corporate America,” said EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru. “The EEOC will continue to bring class lawsuits like this one against employers who engage in gender discrimination on a systemic scale. Hopefully this major settlement will remind employers about the perils of perpetuating promotion practices that keep women from advancing at work.”</blockquote>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/12/outback_steakhouse_pays_19_mil.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/12/outback_steakhouse_pays_19_mil.html</guid>
         <category>Gender Discrimination</category>
         <pubDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2009 08:07:32 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Allstate Pays $4.5 Million To Settle Age Discrimination Lawsuit</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Allstate Insurance company settled an <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093266.html"target="_blank">age discrimination </a>lawsuit the the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ('EEOC") for $4,500,000.  The lawsuit was filed by the <a href="http://EEOC.gov"target="_blank">EEOC</a> on behalf of 90 claimants.  The EEOC alleged that Allstate violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA").  Allstate which is based in Illinois is said to have treated a class of older workers negatively during a companywide reorganization.  In particular Allstate adopted a plan called Preparing For The Future Reorganization Program.  The program was part of Allstate’s reorganization from employee agents to what the company considered independent contractors.  That program had a disproportionate impact on employees over the age of 40 because more than 90 percent of the agents subjected to the hiring moratorium were 40 years of age or older. </p>

<p>Of course <a href="http://www.allstate.com/"target="_blank">Allstate</a> denied that its hiring moratorium violated the ADEA, however the $4.5 million dollar settlement says different.  Companies cannot institute policies that disproportionately affect older workers.  There are many reasons why companies would like to get rid of older workers, namely they can pay younger workers less money, and younger workers are less likely to have large medical bills.  Also, younger workers are less likely to challenge the policies of a company.  </p>

<p> <blockquote>“We at the EEOC are now bringing more and more lawsuits like this one to challenge company-wide policies or practices which discriminate against a large number of workers,” said EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru.  “Make no mistake: As this settlement shows, we will insist on significant compensation and meaningful injunctive relief to resolve these cases.”</blockquote></p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/12/allstate_pays_45_million_to_se_1.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/12/allstate_pays_45_million_to_se_1.html</guid>
         <category>Age Discrimination</category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2009 07:49:42 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>EEOC Report Shows Increase in Discrimination Lawsuits</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("<a href="http://EEOC.gov"target="_blank">EEOC</a>") released its' report for 2008 and it shwos there were 16,752 complaints alleging employment discrimination– up 2.4 percent from the prior year. These complaints are allegations against government agencies only and do not include complaints against private companies.  The complaints were filed against federal agencies on the basis of <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093473.html"target="_blank">retaliation</a>, <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093479.html"target="_blank">gender</a>, race, national origin, religion and age. </p>

<p>Other interesting statistics in the report include of 7,538 cases closed on the merits, 2.5% resulted in findings of unlawful discrimination. Both parties entered into settlements in 19.5 % or 3,249 complaints. Agencies awarded a total of over $50 million in monetary benefits to complainants for unlawful discrimination.</p>

<blockquote>“Federal agencies must step up their efforts to improve complaint processing time, while also focusing on quality results,” said EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru. “</blockquote>
]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/09/eeoc_report_shows_increase_in.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/09/eeoc_report_shows_increase_in.html</guid>
         <category>EEOC</category>
         <pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:48:45 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Disabled Women Gets $275,000 in Lawsuit Settlement</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>The state of <a href="http://www.wisconsin.gov/state/home/app?COMMAND=gov.wi.state.cpp.command.LoadPortalHome"target="_blank">Wisconsin</a> will pay $275,000 to settle a lawsuit filed by Wendy Sturz a parole agent who resigned in 2005. Sturz suffers from a degenerative joint disease that makes it hard for her to walk and stand without pain.   Sturz worked in as a probation and parole agent since 1993 and had received positive performance reviews. In increasing pain, she requested accommodations in 2003 to reduce the stress on her weakening knees, elbows, shoulders and ankles. Sturz claimed the state violated the <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1382750.html"target="_blank">Americans With Disabilities Act</a>.</p>

<p>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. </p>

<blockquote>"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." </blockquote>

<p>The state will pay Sturz, of Ellsworth, $171,000 in back pay and damages under the settlement. Her attorneys will receive $104,000. </p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/09/disabled_women_gets_275000_in.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/09/disabled_women_gets_275000_in.html</guid>
         <category>Americans With Disabilities Act</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 11:30:57 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Restaurant Worker Sues For Sexual Harassment After Hot Dog Used in Lewd Gesture</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>A Taxi's Restaurant worker, Joanne Cole was was sexually assualted by a male co-worker who used hot dogs in lewd gestures simulating fornication and she was bitten by the co-worker until she bled.  The lawsuit by Cole alleges sexual harassment, sexual assault, discrimination and <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093473.html"target="_blank">retaliation</a>. The lawsuit alleges that while she worked for Taxi’s Hamburgers in Dublin California, she was subjected to ongoing <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1276138.html"target="_blank">sexual harassment</a>, sexual assault and discrimination, and upon complaining of the unlawful behavior, nothing was done. </p>

<p>The lawsuit alleges that a Taxi’s supervisor directly observed Joanne Cole being assaulted by another co-worker who was by biting her lips and back while she fought him off telling him to stop. The supervisor did nothing after seeing the assault occur and instead turned his attention back to the television program he was watching. </p>

<p>The allegations state that Ms. Cole was subjected to lewd and lascivious gestures by other male employees including gesturing to their penises to simulate masturbation and holding a hotdog to their lower extremities as if it was a penis and gesturing to female employees. Ms. Cole was also repeatedly bitten on the lips and back by another male co-worker. Taxi’s Hamburgers took no action.  Officers from the <a href="http://ci.dublin.ca.us/"target="_blank">Dublin police </a>department ultimately arrested the former co-worker.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/09/restaurant_worker_sues_for_sex.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/09/restaurant_worker_sues_for_sex.html</guid>
         <category>Sexual Harassment</category>
         <pubDate>Sun, 06 Sep 2009 10:33:53 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>St. Louis Rams Get Tackled By EEOC And Pay $134,000 To Settle Discrimination Lawsuit</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>The <a href="http://www.stlouisrams.com/splash/"target="_blank">St. Louis Rams </a>settled an Americans With Disabilities Act ("<a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1382750.html"target="_blank">ADA</a>") lawsuit with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("<a href="http://EEOC.gov"target="_blank">EEOC</a>") involving disability discrimination for $134,000 and important remedial relief on behalf of Ron DuBuque, a long-term employee with a seizure disorder. DuBuque, who had been an assistant trainer with the team for 11 years before he was terminated, had epilepsy during his entire employment. DuBuque and the EEOC alleged that he had successfully performed his job until the Rams' management, in June 2006, claimed he was a medical liability and posed a threat to his own safety and that of coworkers. DuBuque was diagnosed with trauma-induced epilepsy in 1984, more than a decade before working for the Rams. </p>

<p>Under the terms of the consent decree the Rams will pay a total of $134,000 to settle the case – including emotional distress damages of $100,000 and a $34,000 contract in which DuBuque will be engaged as a Rehabilitation Specialist for two years. The decree also requires the team to provide training on the ADA to managers and supervisors of the Rams. These types of <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093268.html"target="_blank">discrimination</a> cases violate the civil rights act of 1964.</p>

<blockquote>“As this case and many others show, disability does not mean inability,” said EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru. “All employers should make workplace decisions based on merit and qualifications to do the job, rather than on myths, fears, or stereotypes associated with a person’s disability.”</blockquote>

<p><br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/08/st_louis_rams_get_tackled_by_e.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/08/st_louis_rams_get_tackled_by_e.html</guid>
         <category>Americans With Disabilities Act</category>
         <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:06:51 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>EEOC Files Reverse Discrimination Lawsuit</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("<a href="http://EEOC.gov"target="_blank">EEOC</a>") filed a lawsuit against Propak Logistics alleging reverse discrimination.  According to the lawsuit, from October 1, 2002, through June 30, 2004, based <a href="http://www.propak.com/"target="_blank">Propak Logistics, Inc</a>. engaged in unlawful employment practices by refusing to hire an entire class of people for non-management positions at its Shelby, N.C., facility because of their non-Hispanic national origin. The complaint said that the company hired predominantly Latinos to the exclusion of equally or more qualified non-Latinos--this is also known as reverse <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093268.html"target="_blank">discrimination</a>.  </p>

<p>This type of discrimination is national origin discrimination and it is usually filed against companies for not hiring minorities but the door swings both way.  A company cannot discriminate against any group based on race or national origin.  If a company does discrimination based on<a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1437201.html"target="_blank"> national origin</a>, the employee is protected by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.</p>

<blockquote>“Discrimination based on national origin is simply illegal, regardless of the background of the victims or the beneficiaries of that misconduct,” said EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru.</blockquote>
 <blockquote>“This case represents the unfortunate reality that some employers are willing to discriminate against one racial or cultural group in favor of another,” said Lynette Barnes, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Charlotte District Office. </blockquote>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/08/eeoc_files_reverse_discriminat.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/08/eeoc_files_reverse_discriminat.html</guid>
         <category>EEOC</category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 05:58:32 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Scrub, Inc., a Chicago Janitorial Services Provider Sued For Racial Discrimination By EEOC</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Scrub, Inc., a Chicago janitorial services provider, which provides janitorial services to the airline industry at O'Hare International Airport is being sued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commissionn ("EEOC") for <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093469.html"target="_blank">racial discrimination</a> against African Americans in hiring. The EEOC claims although African American workers were a significant segment of Scrub’s labor market and applied for jobs in large numbers, they consistently made up less than two percent of Scrub’s work force. </p>

<p>Racial discrimination in hiring violates <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1095518.html"target="_blank">Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964</a>. The <a href="http://EEOC.gov"target="_blank">EEOC</a> filed suit (EEOC v. Scrub, Inc., Civil Action No. 09 Cc 4228) in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division; the case was assigned to District Judge Suzanne Conlon.  The EEOC is seeking back pay, compensatory and punitive damages for Scrub’s discrim­ination victims. The agency also seeks injunctive relief, including rightful-place hiring of African Americans, training, and instituting policies, practices and programs which provide for equal employment opportunity for black applicants and workers.</p>

<blockquote>“This employer’s hiring practices systematically screened out numerous qualified black victims, and we are suing to seek justice on their behalf,” EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru said.”</blockquote>

<p>John Hendrickson, the EEOC’s regional attorney in Chicago, said, “Assuring the freedom to compete for jobs on a level playing field is one of the fundamental components of the EEOC’s mission. Race discrimination makes free and fair competition impossible, and such discrimination is prohibited by the laws we are charged with enforcing.”</p>

<p><br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/07/scrub_inc_a_chicago_janitorial.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/07/scrub_inc_a_chicago_janitorial.html</guid>
         <category>EEOC</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 04:31:14 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>EEOC Sues Ashley Furniture For Sexual Harassment, National Origin and Racial Discrimination</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("<a href="http://EEOC.gov"target="_blank">EEOC</a>") filed a lawsuit against Ashley Furniture also known as Phil Vinar Furniture Inc., in Moline Illinois alleging Ashley's discriminated against employees and job applicants in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII").  The lawsuit involves approximately 30 to 35 people including employees and job applicants.The lawsuit alleges Ashley's discriminated against Jacqueline Foster because of sexual harassment and also violated the Americans with Disabilities Act ("<a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1382750.html"target="_blank">ADA</a>") by harassing Foster because of her disability and by refusing to provide her with a reasonable accommodation.  The EEOC says Ashleys's retaliated against her and others for complaining about <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093481.html"target="_blank">sexual harassment</a>.</p>

<p>The lawsuit claims Ashley's engaged in racial and national origin discriminated against a class of African-American and Hispanic applicants by refusing to hire them because of their race and <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1437201.html"target="_blank">national origin</a>.  There is also an allegation that Ashley's violated the record keeping provision of <a href="http://http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/vii.html"target="_blank">Title VII </a>by not keeping proper records of applicant and employees races and national origin.</p>

<blockquote>The EEOC office in Chicago files about 30 cases of discrimination a year in Illinois.</blockquote>

<p>The EEOC claims <a href="http://www.ashleyfurniture.com/"target="_blank">Ashleys </a>violated the ADA by denying Foster and another employee health insurance benefits because of their disabilities, that the store engaged in <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093473.html"target="_blank">retaliation</a> against Foster in violation of the ADA by firing her after she engaged in protected activity and that the store violated the ADA by commingling employee medical records and personnel records.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/07/eeoc_sues_ashley_furniture_for.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/07/eeoc_sues_ashley_furniture_for.html</guid>
         <category>EEOC</category>
         <pubDate>Sun, 26 Jul 2009 20:11:24 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Female Hard Hat Hits Glass Ceiling and Files $20 Million Dollar Lawsuit</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Hardhat Bianca Wisniewski broke through the construction industry's <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093278.html"target="_blank">glass ceiling </a>and hit the concrete wall of <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1276138.html"target="_blank">sexual harassment</a>.  Wisniewski sued JPMorgan Chase, <a href="http://www.totalsafety.com/"target="_blank">Total Safety Consulting </a>and others in Manhattan Supreme Court for a harassment campaign she says began when she took over as safety coordinator at the company's 270 Park Ave. construction site in 2007. Following a period on disability, Wisniewski was fired from her job with Total Safety Consulting of Long Island City, Queens after complaining of the sexual harassment.  This constitutes <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093473.html"target="_blank">retaliation</a>.</p>

<p>Wisniewski alleges elevator operator Steve Greco groped and propositioned her while her bosses brushed off her claims.  According to the lawsuit, Greco harassed Wisniewski with lewd come-ons that repulsed the widowed mother of two teenage daughters.  According to the <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2009/07/20/2009-07-20_bianca_wisniewski_.html"target="_blank">Daily News </a>Wisnieski said Greco made the following statements to her.</p>

<blockquote>"I just want to take you to dinner, no f------," she says Greco told her while grabbing her around the waist. </blockquote>

<blockquote>"Everybody kisses engineer Steve," the suit quotes Greco as boasting. "This is a man's world, not a place for women to work." </blockquote>

<p>In 1995, the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission issued its report on the employment of women at the highest levels of business. The Commission found that within Fortune 1000 industrial and Fortune 500 companies, 95-97% of senior managers were male. The Commission also found numerous obstacles regarding the advancement of women in business, including inadequate outreach and recruitment practices, lack of mentoring opportunities and the placement of women in positions within corporations where they are less likely to gain the necessary experience and contacts for future advancement.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/07/female_hard_hat_hits_glass_cei.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/07/female_hard_hat_hits_glass_cei.html</guid>
         <category>Sexual Harassment</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2009 08:18:13 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Morristown Settles Sexual Harassment Lawsuit For Almost $1 Million</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Morristown information technology specialist Ann Marie Spagnola alleged her boss, Eric Maurer, subjected her to <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1276138.html"target="_blank">sexual harassment </a>by exposing her to sexually explicit materials. She alleges was called into his office to remove a sexually explicit screen saver from his computer and when she reported this and other conduct to Morristown Mayor John Delaney, he responded angrily each time. As a result of this action Spagnola submitted her resignation. Spagnola alleges there was a <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1402443.html"target="_blank">hostile work environement </a>and <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093473.html"target="_blank">retaliation</a> as a result of nothing being done after she made her complaint.</p>

<p>After depositions were taken in the case it became obvious Morristown did not have a sexual harassment policy and that Spagnola had in fact been harassed and reported the harassment to the appropriate authority.  Now eight years after Spagnola filed her first complaint and five years after she resigned, the parties settled for $981,990.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/07/morristown_settles_sexual_hara.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/07/morristown_settles_sexual_hara.html</guid>
         <category>Sexual Harassment</category>
         <pubDate>Sun, 19 Jul 2009 09:33:19 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>California Teacher Awarded $65,000 Plus Benefits In Age Discrimination Lawsuit</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("<a href="http://EEOC.gov"target="_blank">EEOC</a>") settled its age-discrimination lawsuit on behalf of Lawford Goddard, a former teacher at Bay Area Colleges. Goddard applied for an assistant professor's position at San Francisco State, where he had been a part-time lecturer since 1989. He had been teaching at Bay Area colleges since earning his doctorate from Stanford in 1976. A faculty committee placed him among three finalists for the job, but the school's dean chose another candidate.</p>

<p>In its lawsuit, the EEOC alleged the dean told the screening committee he wanted "fresh blood and new ideas" and had made comments about getting rid of "old '60s hippies" faculty members.  The lawsuit claimed Goddard was more qualified than the winning candidate for the $65,000-a-year job and had been rejected because of his age, with amounted to <a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1093266.html"target="_blank">age discrimination.</a></p>

<p>The university denied discriminating and said it had chosen a candidate who was more accomplished in his writings, had a superior overall record and had performed superbly since his hiring. The settlement contains no admission of wrongdoing.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/07/california_teacher_awarded_650.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/07/california_teacher_awarded_650.html</guid>
         <category>Age Discrimination</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 07:16:49 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>EEOC Settles ADA Discrimination Lawsuit with Swissotel of Chicago for $90,000</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") settled a federal lawsuit with Swissotel for $90,000 thereby resolving a harassment and wrongful termination lawsuit. </p>

<p>The EEOC charged in its suit that Swissotel violated the Americans With Disabilities Act ("<a href="http://www.lasorsalaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1382750.html"target="_blank">ADA</a>") by permitting two supervisors at its downtown Chicago hotel to harass, then fire the employee because of his developmental disability. The employee was repeatedly called “retarded” by his supervisors.  </p>

<p>In addition to paying $90,000, Swissotel is required under the consent decree settling the suit to give ADA training to all of its Chicago-based employees, post a notice of the settlement at its Chicago hotel, and report to the <a href="http://eeoc.gov"target="_blank">EEOC </a>complaints of harassment or disability discrimination and any actions taken as a result of the complaints.</p>

<p>“<blockquote>Disability-based harassment, just like other forms of discriminatory workplace harassment, is against federal law and is tolerated by employers at their peril,” said John Hendrickson, regional attorney in the EEOC’s Chicago District Office.</blockquote><br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/07/eeoc_settles_ada_discriminatio.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.illinoissexualharassmentattorneyblog.com/2009/07/eeoc_settles_ada_discriminatio.html</guid>
         <category>Americans With Disabilities Act</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:56:18 -0600</pubDate>
      </item>
      
   </channel>
</rss>
