In an even more shocking revelation Garfield terminated an employee because she complained about the sexual harassment, while others were compelled to quit rather than endure the severely hostile work environment. When a worker is forced to quit because of a hostile work environment, it is called constructive discharge. This type of behavior by a large employer is sure to cost them plenty. I am glad the workers who are being sexually harassed decided to stand up and fight. This case will be followed closely and the results will be posted.

“The facts of this case are truly disturbing,” said Anna Y. Park, EEOC attorney. “While hospitals and health care facilities tend to focus on patient care, federal law requires them to protect their employees as well from harassment and sexual abuse.”

According to published accounts a supervisor suggested to the female employees that they come to work not wearing a top. The same supervisor told the women to wear nothing but Vaseline. When you make comments like that, it is hard to plan a good defense. This supervisor also made repeated comments to female employees telling them that they could be strippers and could give him lap dances.

“Employers who subject individuals to harassment based on sex are violating federal law,” said Mary Jo O’Neill, regional attorney for the EEOC.

The company failed to stop the discrimination and prevent the hostile work environment. In a crazy statement the company told Allen he could only stay employed if he agreed not to pursue his discrimination claims. When Allen refused to withdraw the discrimination claims, the company terminated him in retaliation for his opposition to the racial harassment.

“It is appalling that the company not only condoned the vile and offensive racial epithets made to Mr. Allen, but actually warned him that he had to drop his complaints about the racial harassment in order to keep his job,” said EEOC Attorney Debra Lawrence

The lawsuit involved twelve employees and they will all share in the settlement amount. Theresa Hurtado was one of the employees and she was one of the driving forces behind filing the discrimination complaint with the EEOC. There seems to be more employers engaging in crazy conduct in the workplace. I believe some of this may have to do with the bad economy and a feeling that employees will put up with any behavior to keep their jobs. Good for these twelve employees.

EEOC Regional Attorney Mary Jo O’Neill said, “Employees have a right to their own religious beliefs or no religious beliefs. Employees should never be subjected unwillingly to a supervisor’s religious views."

The employee Basil Massih was subjected to harassment which included mimicking Massih’s accent, ethnic slurs such as “camel jockey,” mocking Arab ululations, and taunting and jeering at Massih relating to news stories about Iraq and the capture of terrorists. The lawsuit alleges that Massih complained to a number of managers about the national origin harassment, but that management failed to take corrective action, and that the continued harassment resulted in intolerable working conditions for Massih.

“Employers have an affirmative duty to protect employees from discrimination and harass­ment,” said Mary Jo O’Neill EEOC attorney.“

The lawsuit alleged a Biewer supervisor repeatedly exposed himself to female employees over several years. The company didn't fire the supervisor until prosecutors charged him with lewd and lascivious behavior. It is really crazy that the company would allow a man like this to continue working even after he behaved in this fashion. It took criminal charges to finally make the company see the light. It was good the female employees hung in there and fought for their rights.

Another factor to consider is whether or not you wish to file a lawsuit in state court, federal court or have an administrative law judge at the Illinois Human Rights Commission ("IHRC") decide your case. Having the IHRC decide the case is the least expensive but may take the longest. Federal court is the quickest route to take but it is also the most difficult, expensive and employment law on the federal level favors employers in my opinion. It is important to discuss all options with attorney Peter LaSorsa and see which one works best for your situation. Sometimes the amount of time since the last date of sexual harassment will dictate which way to proceed. For example if you wait 200 days to contact my office, we will have no choice but to file with the EEOC.

The assistant manager no longer works for Cactus Grill Inc. and that will be bad news for the Cactus. The reason it is bad news, is because since he no longer works for the company, he is in a position to tell the truth and not worry about losing his job, since he already lost it. Many times companies end up in a bad position because the person who did the sexual harassment gets terminated and becomes a good witness for the complainant.

“Sexual harassment in the workplace is always wrong, but harassment of teenage workers, who are often in their first ‘real’ job, is even more egregious,” said James Neely, EEOC district director.

Prior to filing a lawsuit in either federal or state court, a person must first file a complaint with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). It is nice to see people stand up and take a position and not let their bosses push them around. We wish Colleen Vesper the best.

The settlement amount includes $20,000 for compensatory damages, $5,000 for past wages and $25,000 for attorney fees. In cases like this, where one man has so much power, lawyers will often advice the party to settle. If this case were to go to trial and if the facts alleged were proven, the damages would easily be in the six figure range.

The final straw for Lyznick happened when he was getting dressed in the locker room and Dery slipped a finger into his underwear and touched the deputy's rear end. There were other officers who came forward and also complained about Dery and the Judge believed the testimony of them in this case. The sexual harassment lawsuit started in a wierd manner as it was originally a jury trial but both sides were having trouble picking a jury and agreed to have a bench trial and let the Judge decide the issue.

"He wanted to sue the county for money and get rid of Dery," The County's Attorney said.

The women first filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") and then the EEOC referred to case to the United States Justice Department for investigation. You can see how much money agencies and companies have to pay because of the behavior of their workers when they act in such a foolish fashion. Until companies and organizations properly train their employees on what is acceptable behavior these types of cases will continue.

"It is critical that employers understand what constitutes sexual harassment, and that they take allegations of harassment seriously," said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.

In her lawsuit she claims that she complained about Cook's behavior and the IRS answer was to transfer her. Instead of accepting the transfer she stayed put and was assigned to another manager. There was never any discipline to Cook and Klein believed she was not having her complaints taken seriously. This case shows that management would rather just shuffle the deck and hope things go away, rather than address the problem head on.

It is nice to see someone stand up for themselves and not let management push them around. Lets see if a jury things the IRS handled the situation properly.

In the second case Renee Wrede twice complained of gender discrimination and remarkably both times Boeing’s own investigators substantiated her complaints. This is the remarkable part of this case. Even though Boeing was able to agree that Wrede was suffering from gender discrimination, Boeing allowed her harassers to influence her layoff evaluations and reduce her scores. It should be no suprise that Wrede was also layed off. Even though Boeing tried to manipute evidence, the EEOC’s investigation proved Boeing manipulated evaluation scores in order to justify the terminations of Wrede and Castron. It is hard to believe corporations still behave like this.

“Covert attempts to mask discriminatory and retaliatory motives, such as Boeing employed, will fool no one.” said EEOC acting attorney Rayford Irvin.

The problem for the EEOC was that a Judge ruled against the EEOC and in favor of CRST in a motion for summary judgment thereby dismissing the sexual harassment lawsuit. In federal court, a Judge can award attorney fees to a defendant who wins their motion for summary judgement thereby increasing the risk of litigation for a plaintiff. Another words, if you file a sexual harassment lawsuit in federal court and it is dismissed prior to a jury trial, a Judge could make you pay the attorney fees of the defendant, which in this case were a little more than $4.5 million.

Victims of sexual harassment should consider this ruling before deciding to undertake a lawsuit in federal court because of the potential for paying the attorney fees of the defendant. In Chicago average attorney fees for employment lawyers defending companies can range from $250-$850 per hour.

"The EEOC believes the court's decisions in the case were wrongfully decided and the agency will be appealing," said EEOC Deputy General Counsel James Lee.