Additionallty, Landwin Management which managed the San Gabriel Hilton subjected female employees to sexual harassment. Allegations of sexual harassment included the housekeeping department supervisor calling the women prostitutes and whores. The women complained to management and nothing was done to stop the sexual harassment. You can see how much money this ended up costing the company--not much of a cost savings. The company also has to deal with the negative publicity.

“The days when employers make decisions based on stereotypes and assumptions shaped by the race or national origin of their employees should be far behind us,” said Anna Y. Park, the regional attorney for the EEOC.

According to the lawsuit, after engaging in four separate threesomes, Monaghan and her husband agreed that she should end the affair but Hetland pressured her to keep having sex. At one point Monaghan told management about the demands for sex and she claims the company engaged in retaliation by firing her rather than address the problem. The stress of all of this made Monaghan continue to drink more and more and eventually led to problems with the law. She was arrested for a DUI and eventually fired from her job. The details of this case are pretty shocking and unique.

"Plaintiff was terminated in retaliation for opposing Hetland's sexual harassment and refusing to participate in sexual encounters. Plaintiff's termination constitutes an adverse employment action," the lawsuit states.

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.

Napolitano also told the chief that “the firefighters would not be intimidated into making false statements.”

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.

In addition to paying the money, as part of the settlement Walmart must offer the next 50 positions to females and after that every third position will be offered to females. This case lasted a very long time and the amount although large in the grand scheme of things is very small for a large company like Walmart. People should realize that big companies will fight and use delay tactics when faced with discrimination lawsuits. Corporate greed seems to be getting worse in this country and organizations like the EEOC keep fighting the good fight for the average person.

“Let this major settlement serve as a warning: Employers must stop engaging in these outdated and sexist practices, or they will face severe legal consequences.” said Acting EEOC Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru

According to court testimony in the case the trouble for Moore began when he fired his personal assistant Hallaman. Hallaman claims he was fired for rebuffing sexual advances. This would constitute retaliation. Several former Smithfield's employees testified that they also rejected Moore's sexual advances and were fired. Moore acknowledged at trail that he is bisexual. Moore also insisted that he fired Hallaman for poor job performance and because Hallaman forged a check. The jury didn't buy these claims.

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.

The school has a different story regarding Jacksons claims. The school claims Jackson was a poor worker and that many other employees refused to work with her. They claim they did not renew her contract because of her work performance not because they were retaliating against her. Both sides claim they have witnesses that will prove their respective cases. It should be an interesting trial if it ever gets to that point. Many cases settle and I am sure this one will settle at some point. The school should think about how much money they will spend in legal fees. On a positive note for the school district, the EEOC did not file the charge themselves and only issued a right to sue letter which it must do in all cases if it does not complete a full investigation or file the federal lawsuit itself.

“As a direct result of Jackson’s complaining to her superiors and officers of the defendent, she was disciplined and her employment contract was not renewed,”

According to allegations in the lawsuit on a daily bases Bass would persistently make sexual advances and remarks toward Brewer. Although Brewer claims most the the time Bass would make sure the two of them were alone before he began his sexual advances, Brewer also claims a few times there were witnesses present. Brewer claims she told Bass many times to stop his bevahior but he refused.

"The reason for the termination was pretextual and simply a ruse designed to hide the illegal conduct," according to the lawsuit.

In a big help for the female worker several male co-workers saw and overheard the gender discrimination and degrading treatment and backed her up when she complained to management. The female did complain about the gender discrimination to management and the men did back her up. Even the men thought they would be the subject of retaliation for supporting the female worker in her harassment claim. The company ended up terminated the female and two of her male supported but not before the department manager called the men troublemakers and told them they better shut up.

“Employers have a responsibility to maintain an environment free of sex discrimination and retaliation,” said EEOC Regional Attorney Mary Jo O’Neill. “Here, the managers themselves committed both those offenses.

“You hear rumors, but I feel like if it was something that was relevant that I needed to know about, someone would have presented it to me,” Hammon said.

According to the lawsuit the company tolerated the alleged sexual harassment and thus created a hostile work environment. The company also engaged in retaliation by firing the workers once they complained of being sexually harassed. Some older workers will try to take advantage of younger workers and even think they can get away with sexually harassing them. In this case if the allegations are true the company did not do what it should have.

"Giumarra Vineyards denies the allegations in the complaint filed by the EEOC and will vigorously defend itself against all of the allegations. When this matter is concluded we are confident that our position will be affirmed." said a Guimarra Vineyards release

The allegations in the complaint were that McCloud began working for the USPS and her immediate supervior, Mr. Purifoy did the following over the course of two days: stared at Plaintiff; made comments that Plaintiff was beautiful; danced around Plaintiff in an awkward manner; told Plaintiff, "I'll give you Friday off if you go out to the club with me;" gave Plaintiff Thursday and Friday off and grabbed Plaintiff's wrist when she reached for her time card. The complaint was based on those six incidents over a two day period.

McCloud told management about what happened, they investigated and removed Purifoy from managing her. Over the next two months McCloud claims to have seen Purifoy at work a few times but that he never spoke to her and that he had no work control over her--yet she quit her job claiming she could not even look at him without feeling wierd. The court found that this did not rise to the level of constructive discharge.