Illinois Sexual Harassment Attorney Blog

Area Temps will pay $650,000 to settle a discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). The discrimination lawsuit is based on age discrimination, gender discrimination, racial discrimination and national origin discrimination. It is rare to find a lawsuit that is sucessful and allegeding all four categories.

According to published accounts of the lawsuit Area Temps unlawfully complied with discriminatory requests made by its clients based on race, sex, national origin and age, and unlawfully fired two of its employees in retaliation for their opposition to Area Temps’ discriminatory practices. The company also fired one employee for participation in the EEOC’s investigation. The company that made the request of Area Temp for the discriminatory practices should also be held accountable.

“The EEOC is pleased that Area Temps joined with the agency to negotiate a fair settlement resolving this matter,” said EEOC Regional Attorney Debra Lawrence.

Mike Enyart & Sons, a construction company is sued for racial discrimination and illegally firing an employee who complained about the conduct. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") filed the lawsuit on behalf of Mareo Allen an African-American. According to accounts that were published, Allen was subjected to a hostile work environment based on his race, when he worked for the company on a sewer line installation project. While working on that project co-workers and a foreman repeatedly used racially offensive slurs and epithets to Allen and other black persons, including n----r, black boy and colored boy.

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

Home builder John Wieland Homes pays $378,500 and must hire at least 10 blacks and women in management positions over the next six years to settle a racial discrimination and gender discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). The lawsuit was filed on behalf of one white woman and five black sales agents. The lawsuit was the culmination of various lawsuits and investigations into the employment practices at this place of business. It is good to final see a resolution to all of the employment law issues.

According to published reports Wieland discriminated against black sales agents by purposely sending them to specific housing subdivisions based on the race of the surrounding community. The black sales agents ended up mainly in black subdivisions which did not have the same dollars in sales as the white subdivisions. Because of this black sales agents earned less than their white counterparts. People have to be given a level playing field in order to properly compete with their counterparts.

Robert Dawkins, attorney for the EEOC, said in a statement. "This resolution provides relief to the last remaining victims of that alleged practice.”

Silgan Containers Manufacturing Corporation pays $45,000 to settle a racial discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of an African-American man who suffered discriminatory treatment that resulted in his termination. According to published documents Silgan intentionally delayed the hiring of Romardro Henderson and then firied him because of his race.

When Henderson was finally hired, his immediate supervisor subjected Henderson to disparate and discriminatory treatment such as holding him to a higher standard on his work than non-black employees. Silgan fired Henderson for racial reasons after less than one month on the job. The supervisor who subjected Henderson to the treatment is no longer working for the company. This case illustrates how one person can engage in discrimination and hold the company responsible. The company must do a better job training its' employees and management.

“This case demonstrates that racial discrimination in the American workplace is a serious and ongoing concern,” said John Rowe, EEOC district director in Chicago.

McGriff Industries, Inc. pays $100,000 to settle a racial harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Todd Roseborough, Sr., Paul Hogan and Aaron Greenwood all African-American employees. According to details in the lawsuit employees and managers used racially derogatory comments, slurs, and insults directed at African-Americans employees. The racial misconduct escalated to threats and intimidation, including a derogatory threat to cut one of the black employees.

Both white and black employees were offended by the racial harassment but were retaliated against when they complained. In once instance an employee was terminated when he complained about the discrimination that was taking place. This type of behavior by a large company is outrageous. These individuals hung in there and fought for their rights and in the end they prevailed. Hopefully, the company will not wish to dole out this kind of money in the future and will better train employees on the proper work behavior.

“This case is important because no employee should be subject to racism in the workplace and every employee can be offended by a racially hostile work environment,” said EEOC Birmingham District Director Delner Franklin-Thomas.

Spencer Reed Group will pay $125,000 to settle a racial discrimination, age discrimination and retaliation lawsuit brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a 55-year-old white employee. According to the lawsuit Spencer Reed violated federal law by discriminating against 55-year-old Caucasian employee because of her race and age and fired her as retaliation for her complaining about it. She was treated different than the younger African Americans.

The white woman worked as a senior functional analyst for Spencer Reed Group since 2003, was treated differently in many ways because of her age and race. She was subjected to adverse employment actions such as unduly harsh discipline, denied training, given the heaviest and most difficult workload and forced to provide work reports on a weekly instead of monthly basis.

One of the woman’s co-workers, a lead financial management analyst, said she felt that the treatment indicated “prejudice.” Finally the employee complained about the disparate treatment, but she was fired as retaliation the next day, the EEOC charged.

Noble Metal Processing will pay $190,000 to settle a racial discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a class of non-white employees. According to details in the lawsuit, Noble repeatedly overlooked qualified non-white employees, including a group of black employees and a Bangladeshi employee, for promotions to the maintenance department.

Also included in the case was a white employee who opposed this type of racial discrimination and complained that managers in the maintenance department were using racial slurs was fired shortly after the company learned of his complaints. It is hard to imagion companies still behaving in this fashion given the amount of information that is available on discrimination. Once again the EEOC did a great job and held the company responsible. I see many discrimination cases based on non-white workers from countries in the far east.

“Noble should be commended for reaching a resolution despite its financial difficulties,” said Nedra Campbell, an EEOC attorney in the Commission’s Detroit office. Under the parties’ agreement, seven employees will share in the lump sum settlement amount of $190,000.

Affordable Care coughs up $150,000 to settle a sexual harassment and racial discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of two female employees. According to published documents Affordable Care violated federal law when its affiliated dentist, Nelson Wood, engaged in sexual harassment and racially harassed two female employees. The facts were that Wood created a sexually and racially hostile work environment for Ariede Mills, who is African American, and Laura Carl, who is white.

The lawsuit alleged Wood referred to women as “whining bitches,” propositioned Mills for sex, spanked Carl repeatedly on the buttocks, made insulting remarks about blacks, and claimed that he had a relative who was a member of the Ku Klux Klan. It is outrageous the a professional would act in this manner. Both Mills and Carl complained repeatedly about Wood to Affordable Care but the company failed to stop the harassment. To add fuel to the fire Mills was fired in retaliation for her complaints, and Carl was forced to quit because of the offensive conduct. Quitting because of that type of behavior is referred to as constructive discharge.

EEOC Attorney Markus L. Penzel said “The EEOC is pleased that Affordable Care worked cooperatively with us to resolve this case with minimal litigation."

According to the lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") the Dollins Construction company punished black workers for complaining about a noose display and racist statements. According to the lawsuit Dollins violated federal law by racially harassing three African American construction workers and then engaging in retaliation against them when one complained.

Apparently the racial discrimination included the use of racially charged comments and the display of a noose. After they complained about the racial harassment they were not sent out on any further jobs, which is retaliation. As part of the settlement they will receive $15,000. Not only does this type of behavior cost the company money but I am sure it will cost them business with people who do not want to hire a company that allows this type of activity to take place.

“No matter how small an employer may be or how limited its resources, the EEOC will use the full measure of the law to eradicate racist displays from any place of employment,” said EEOC District Director James R. Neely, Jr.

Creative Networks will pay $110,000 to settle a retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Rhonda Encinas-Castro. The lawsuit claims two coordinators at the company were the victims of retaliation for complaining about national origin and racial discrimination and participating in an investigation about both.

Details in the lawsuit claim that Castro went to the EEOC to file a charge of discrimination based on national origin and race. However, the company fired Castro about 14 days later. Also the executive director threatened to fire Kathryn Allen, who had never been disciplined for anything before, because she had been named as a witness in Castro’s discrimination charge. This type of behavior by a company is not only wrong but illegal. The company could not honestly believe they would get away with this type of discriminatory behavior.

"We will continue to vigorously protect employees who complain about discrimination or serve as witnesses to it because they are the lifeblood to effective enforcement." said EEOC attorney Mary Jo O'Neill

Poplar Springs Nursing Center pays $40,000 to settle an age discrimination and racial discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC")According to the lawsuit, Poplar Springs discriminated against Gloria Carey, a 53-year-old black female, by denying her a social worker position because of her age and her race.

The amazing fact was Carey’s 27-plus years of experience as a social worker. Even with tis amount of time Poplar Springs refused to consider her for the position. Instead a less qualified 34-year-old white female was the only candidate interviewed and then hired. This shows that even though you don't have a document saying I won't hire you because of your race or age, circumstances can be utilized to prove your case.

Preston Hood Chevrolet pays $120,000 to settle a sexual harassment, gender discrimination and racial discrimination lawsuit. The lawsuits were filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of females employees and Rickey Hayes. According to the lawsuits Preston Hood subjected a class of female employees to gender harassment and to sexually explicit, provocative and insulting language, pornographic material and unwelcome sexual advances.

Additionally, Preston Hood subjected Rickey Hayes to racial discrimination because he was black. Details of that harassment include, racial slurs and racially derogatory language. In both cases, the employees complained to management and nothing was done to stop or correct the harassment. You would think management would have the brains to realize that with so many people coming forward and complaining something bad must be going on. Many times management likes to put its head in the sand and take the approach that if they just ignore the problem it will go away. That was a costly mistake in this case.

“Every employee deserves the freedom to work in an environment free from any form of harassment,” EEOC attorney Delner Franklin-Thomas said.

Pace Services a construction company pays $122,500 to settle a national origin, racial discrimination and religious discrimination lawsuit. The lawsuit wasa filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Mohammad Kaleemuddin who is of the Islamic faith and East Indian descent. The lawsuit also included 13 other employees because they were black or Hispanic.

According to the allegations in the lawsuit a Pace supervisor referred to Kaleemuddin as “terrorist,” “Taliban,” “Osama” and “Al-Qaeda.” Kaleemuddin complained to superiors about the harassment but nothing was done to stop it. Finally, Kaleemuddin was fired by the supervisor who was harassing him. Allegedly the same supervisor, as well as others in Pace management, regularly referred to African Americans as “n----s” and to Hispanics as “f-----g Mexicans.”

EEOC Attorney Jim Sacher said, “Employees have an absolute right to be free from discriminatory harassment in the workplace. The EEOC will vigorously challenge violations of this statutory right.”

The most frequently filed charges of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") in 2009 were racial discrimination (36 percent), retaliation (36 percent) and gender discrimin­ation (30 percent). The reason why the numbers add up to over 100 is that charges of discrimination can have multiple categories selected. For example someone may file a charge claiming racial discrimination, gender discrimination and retaliation. In fact it is more common to have multiple charges than just a single charge of discrimination.

Virdia Spain a former Elgin Mental Health Center aide who was fired after a patient in her care died from a food allergy filed a lawsuit against her former employer claiming she was terminated based on on racial discrimination--because she is black. According to the lawsuit her employer blamed her and another minority worker for the death, while a white employee who was more responsible went unpunished and did not lose his job.

The tragic incident involved Howard Morris, who was a patient and who was given fish for dinner despite warnings of his severe allergy. Morris went into anaphylactic shock and died. The employer blamed Spain and the other minority worker and fired her. This type of case illustrates how some employers may try to limit their liability by blaming a worker and taking action against the worker. In this case, Spain, was an employee for Elgin Mental Health Center for 20 years.

"Myself and Mrs. Tuson, both being minorities were accused of reckless homicide when all the evidence shows that the (other employee) assigned dinner trays," the suit states. "Also, Mr. Morris had eaten 75 percent - 80 percent of his dinner before I took over."

The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that a complaint filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") can be faxed instead of filed in person or through the mail. If you have a charge of discrimination, whether based on gender, race, religion or sexual harassment you have to file the charge within 180 with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") or 300 days with the EEOC. The IDHR has always allowed for complaints to be filed by fax but the EEOC never recognized fax filings. In Laouini v. CLM Freight Lines, Inc. the Seventh Circuit held that a receipt showing a fax was sent to the EEOC is sufficient to prove the date of filing.

It is always very important to remember that there are very strict time limits to filing a charge of discrimination. You must not procrastonate and let too much time slip away. In some instances an employer may drag out the internal investigation so that by the time you receive the internal findings of the company, more than 180 days has passed and you can't file a charge with the IDHR.

Continue reading "EEOC Complaints Can Be Faxed" »

Big Lots settled a racial discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of five employees for $400,000. According to the lawsuit Big Lots violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by subjecting a black maintenance mechanic and other black employees to racial harassment and racial discrimination at its distribution center.

The documents filed in the litigation also claim Hispanic workers including an immediate supervisor made racially derogatory jokes, and comments including the use of the words “n----r” and “monkey.” The men reported the racial discrimination to management but Big Lots failed to correct or stop the harassment.

“Working in a job that they valued highly, the employees in this case rightfully expected to earn a living free of discrimination,” said Anna Park, regional attorney of the EEOC’s Los Angeles District Office. “

Latino workers who filed a racial discrimination and sexual harassment lawsuit against Hilton Hotels settled their sexual harassment lawsuit for $500,000. The problem started when Landwin Management Inc. took over management of the Hilton hotel in 2005, some Latino banquet servers were fired and replaced with less qualified Chinese workers. The Latino employees contacted the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") which filed the lawsuit on the workers behalf.

According to Landwin they agreed to settle because they wanted to avoid expensive litigation costs that might lead to even more job losses at the hotel. That is a real laugh. Settling a lawsuit for half a million is a tacit admission of guilt even if the hotel won't come out and claim it. The bottom line is that most businesses only care about saving money and cutting costs and if they have to trample on the rights of employees, they really don't care. This is a classic example of that.

"If you can show that the job required certain special skills that could only be filled by Chinese speakers, that would be a different matter," said Derek Li, the supervisory trial attorney for the EEOC.

Stokes-Hodges Chevrolet Cadillac will pay $140,000 to settle a racial discrimination lawsuit. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") alleged the car dealer allowed a white male management consultant to subject an African American sales manager to racially derogatory comments. The comments occured when the white consultant would visit the dealership three or four times a week over a four week period. As a result of the nasty comments, the African American sales manager was subjected to a hostile work environment.

The comments were humiliating and were always in the presence of other people. The sales manager complained to management about the derogatory comments and at one point two white managers asked the consultant to stop his discriminatory behavior. However the consultant ignored the requests of the white managers and continued to make the derogatory comments at every opportunity. Upper management did not force the consultant to stop his behavior and a lawsuit was filed to protect the rights of the African American employee.

“This is an outrageous case where an African American employee was subjected to humiliating and degrading behavior,” said Bernice Kimbrough, district director for the EEOC’s Atlanta District Office. “

Sims Chevrolet pays $85,000 settling a racial discrimination and retalia­tion lawsuit brought by five former employees. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employ­ment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the former employee. The allegations include that beginning in July 2007, Sims Chevrolet subjected a class of African Americans to different terms and conditions of employment on the basis of their race. Additionally this created a hostile work environment.

According to papers filed in the lawsuit the racial discrimination included racial epithets, such as repeated use of the N-word. Management also made decisions based upon the race of the employee and at one point the company engaged in retaliation against one employee after he complained about the racial discrimination.

EEOC Acting Regional Attorney Debra M. Lawrence of the Philadelphia District Office, which oversees parts of Ohio, said, “This case of discrimination could have been avoided if the employer had followed Title VII requirements."

Vanguard Group settled a racial discrimination lawsuit with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") for $300,000. The lawsuit was based on a black prospective employee, Barbara Alexander who was not hired for a financial planning manager position because of her race. Alexander had substantial work experience and was well qualified for the position of financial planning manager. Alexander has an MBA in finance and possessed 14 years of financial management experience. Vanguard passed over Alexander for employment and hired a less qualified white applicant.

In this day and age many companies are sophisticated enough not to come right out and say we aren't hiring you because of your race. Racial discrimination lawsuits are usually proven and settlements obtained through diligent discovery and comparison of other employees. It is imperative to contact an employment attorney who concentrates on discrimination lawsuits.

Acting Regional Attorney Debra Lawrence of the EEOC’s Philadelphia District Office, said, “We commend Vanguard for its willingness to resolve this matter amicably and early in the litigation process."

Continue reading "Vanguard Group Pays $300,000 To Settle Racial Discrimination Lawsuit" »

Bahama Breeze which operates a national restaurant chain settled a racial discrimination lawsuit for $1,260,000. The case involved 37 black workers at the company’s Beachwood, Ohio location. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the workers after settlement attempts failed. According to the lawsuit, Bahama Breeze managers committed persistent acts of racial harassment numerous times against black employees. These acts included calling black staff with racial slurs such as “nigger” “Aunt Jemima,” “homeboy,” and “you people.”

As if that were not enough, it is alleged that the managers also imitated speech patterns of black employees, and denied them breaks while allowing breaks to white employees. The employees complained numerous times to management however the racial harassment and discrimination continued. Management did not seem to realize how serious the racial harassment was and now that the company must pay over one million dollars I am sure they realize how serious it is. Aside from the settlement amount in this case, I wonder how much money Bahama Breeze will lose as a result of lost revenue from people who don't wish to give this company their business.

“No worker should ever have to endure a racially hostile work environment in order to earn a paycheck,” said EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru. “It is particularly disturbing when managers engage in and condone the very unlawful conduct they are required to prevent and correct."

Donna Auguste, a high-tech entrepreneur, settled her lawsuit for $1 million against Santa Clara California and Larimar County, Colorado. Santa Clara County will pay Auguste $750,000 and Larimar County will pay $250,000. Auguste filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in 2003 after she alleged sheriff’s deputies and investigators with the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office used false information to obtain a search warrant for her Lyons home. She claims one reason they did this is because of her race-black. She alleged racial discrimination.

Auguste alleged she was harassed and intimidated by Santa Clara authorities after she investigated a sexual assault case involving her nephew, Damon Auguste. The lawsuit claimed California authorities tried to harass and intimidate witnesses and members of Damon Auguste’s family including Donna Auguste. The harassment included having sheriff’s deputies execute a search warrant based on false information from the California authorities.

William E. Hill, a white man was once the city of Dayton's director of Information and Technology Services until he was fired by former black City Manager Rashad Young. This led to Hill filing a claim of reverse discrimination alleging racial discrimination. The Dayton City Commission will pay a $145,000 to settle this racial discrimination lawsuit.

To further complicate matters, city records show that during Young’s tenure as a manager, half of the 24 employees he hired were white men. The problems began because of a dispute over other employees and in the end Young and Hill were pitted against each other. An exhaustive investigation was completed and in the end the city decided settling was the most practical approach.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") 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 retaliation, gender, race, national origin, religion and age.

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.

“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. “

Continue reading "EEOC Report Shows Increase in Discrimination Lawsuits" »

NPMG Acquisition Sub, LLC, ("NPMG") agreed to pay $415,000 and in addition to other relief as part of a racial discrimination lawsuit settlement. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a group of three African American workers who were subjected to to racial slurs and epithets.

According to the lawsuit two white supervisors engaged in severe verbal abuse which created and perpetuated a racially hostile work environment against black employees. In addition to the $415,000, the company must provide a written apology to the three African American workers on company letterhead, post notices and conduct anti-discrimination training.

“It was unbelievable, the things they said,” said Michael Buckner, one of the discrimination victims. "My supervisors often referred to my fellow African-American employees and me as ‘n-----rs’ and ‘porch monkeys’ and forced us to play so-called ‘Civil War games’ where employees were divided into North and South. They also referred to black children or mixed-race children as ‘porch monkeys’ or ‘Oreo babies.’ On several occasions, I was told to turn off my ‘jigaboo music.’”

Continue reading "NPMG Pays $415,000 To Settle Racial Discrimination Lawsuit" »

The Illinois Human Rights Act ("IHRA") also known as, 775 ILCS 5/1-101 will now offer protection to individuals who have an order of protection. Starting at the first of the year it will be considered unlawful discrimination, based on order of protection status, to take any negative job action on an individual if they have an order of protection and there is no legitimate business reason for the negative job action.

This new law adds order of protection status to the current protected classifications of religion, age, race, national origin, gender, marital status, disability, sexual orientation, military status, and unfavorable discharge from military service. The initial charge would be filed with the Illinois Department of Human Rights in either Chicago or Springfield.

Continue reading "New Illinois Law Takes Affect January 1, 2010 Adding Additional Discrimination Protections" »

A discrimination lawsuit has been filed against Minnesota State University ("MSU") by director of the University's Campus Access Program ("CAP"), Tonya Phillips and the program's retention specialist Dalton Crayton, claiming they've been subjected to racial discrimination and retaliation based on their race.

Under federal law Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, retaliation occurs when an employee is fired or has his/her terms and conditions of work changed as a result of making a formal complaint of discrimination. Title VII also protects those individuals who testify, assist or participate in an investigation of illegal activity or those who oppose unlawful employment practices.

University spokesperson Michael Cooper says MSU couldn't comment on the issue because it's pending litigation.The Minnesota State College and University system says MSU is moving to have the case dismissed; that motion will be heard October 23 in US District Court.

Continue reading "Two Females File Discrimination Lawsuit Against Minnesota State University " »

An Information Technology analyst for Kenny Construction filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against his female boss in cook county. A copy of the lawsuit is here:Lott Complaint
Lott who is also African-American alleges his white female boss discriminated against him because of his race, also known as racial discrimination. According to the complaint, the female boss, Laura Manaugh was the IT Manager and said the following to Lott: "I love you", Managers and employees end up sleeping together because of the vibe of the working relationship", "You remind me of my husband, he is so good in bed", and "Woman are in control because we have the pussy."

According to the complaint Lott complained about the sexual harassment to human resources and nothing was done to stop the behavior. In fact according to Lott, the workplace became a hostile working environment after he reported the offensive behavior. Lott is seeking damages in excess of $50,000.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") announced it settled a racial discrimination lawsuit against Material Resources LLC for $50,000 in compensatory damages, payment of $7,500 to an ex-employee and the company will offer anti-discrimination training.

The lawsuit alleged the company doing business as Gateway Co-Packing Co. didn't give a black employee the pay raise and health insurance coverage his white co-workers got. The EEOC says the company then fired the employee after he filed a complaint. This is commonly referred to as retaliation. In Illinois if an employee complains of discriminatory conduct the company cannot then discipline or termination the employee as a result of the employee bringing the discriminatory conduct to the attention of the company.

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 racial discrimination 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.

Racial discrimination in hiring violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC 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.

“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.”

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.”

Continue reading "Scrub, Inc., a Chicago Janitorial Services Provider Sued For Racial Discrimination By EEOC" »

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") 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 ("ADA") 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 sexual harassment.

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 national origin. There is also an allegation that Ashley's violated the record keeping provision of Title VII by not keeping proper records of applicant and employees races and national origin.

The EEOC office in Chicago files about 30 cases of discrimination a year in Illinois.

The EEOC claims Ashleys violated the ADA by denying Foster and another employee health insurance benefits because of their disabilities, that the store engaged in retaliation 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.

Continue reading "EEOC Sues Ashley Furniture For Sexual Harassment, National Origin and Racial Discrimination" »

Eastman Kodak will pay more than $21 million to settle a pair of racial discrimination lawsuits filed by current and former African-American employees. The lawsuits were filed in 2004 and 2007 by an African-American group of Kodak workers accusing Kodak of discriminating against African-American workers when it came to job hiring, pay and promotions.

An employer may not terminate an employee, retaliate, or take other adverse job action because of race or color. Work rules must be applied uniformly to all employees, regardless of color or race. Policies that have a disproportionately adverse impact on minorities are strictly prohibited.

Kodak released the following statement:

PLAINTIFFS AND EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY ANNOUNCE SETTLEMENT OF RACE DISCRIMINATION CLASS ACTION

Continue reading "Kodak Settles Racial Discrimination Lawsuit for $21 Million" »

The United States Supreme Court in 14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett, 129 S. Ct. 1456 (2009) by a 5-4 vote held that a provision in a collective bargaining agreement ("Agreement") which clearly and unmistakeably requires employees to arbitrate their statutory discrimination claims is enforceable and precludes employees from asserting their statutory claims in state or federal courts. In laymans terms what this means is that if you are in a union and through bargaining the union agrees to settle all employment claims through arbitration, your sole remedy as a union employee is to arbitrate the claim. You will be forever barred from filing a claim in any federal or state court.

This decision does not affect employees who are not in a union as they have not bargained through their representatives the terms of their employment. The types of claims involved could include sexual harassment, gender discrimination, age discrimination, racial discrimination. Americans with Disabilities, age discrimination, religious discrimination, retaliation claims and sexual orientations claims.

The Court did hold that the Agreement to arbitrate must be "clear and unmistakable". One issue the Court did not address is what happens if the Union does not take the employees claim to arbitration? There are two ways to interpert the Court's decision in Pyett, one the employee would have no further remedy or in that case the employee court take the case to state or federal court, however the latter seems less likely under Pyett.

Fire Mountain Restaurants LLC, doing business as Ryan’s Family Steakhouse (Ryan’s) settled a lawsuit with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") for $500,000. According to the EEOC’s lawsuit Ryan’s subjected black and female employees to a sex-based and race-based hostile work environment, as well as adverse terms and conditions of employment. In some instances, african-american workers were terminated because of their race. The EEOC charged that white employees were also harassed because of their association with black coworkers and family members. The mistreatment included being referred to as “n----r lovers” and “race traitors” by white managers.

The EEOC claimed female workers were harassed because of their gender, and all complainants suffered retaliation for reporting the discrimination. The gender-based hostile work environment included male managers physically intimidating women, making sexual advances, and calling them gender-related epithets such as bitches. This is a form of gender discrimination.

“Any company – whether large, mid-sized or small – should know better than to allow discrimination and harassment to run rampant,” said EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru. “No one should ever have to endure a hostile workplace in order to make a living. Employers that continue to violate federal anti-discrimination laws risk enforcement action by the EEOC.”

Continue reading "Ryan's Family Steakhouse Pays $500,000 To Settle Sexual Harassment Lawsuit" »

Federal District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer entered a consent decree resolving two lawsuits against Chateau Del Mar, Inc. and Hickory Properties, Inc., known as Hickory Hills Country Club. Under the decree, the defendants are required pay $590,000, including attorneys’ fees, to a class of women who endured a sexually hostile work environment and retaliation, and, in addition, up to another $100,000 to African American applicants who were denied hire because of their race, also known as racial discrimination.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") lawsuit, filed on March 25, 2008 under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 alleged that the principal and manager of the facility sexually harassed a class of women employees over a period of years and refused to hire African American applicants. Female employees were called derogatory names and belittled as well as enduring sexual advances and, in some instances, physical assaults.

Shortly after three of the women filed their own private federal lawsuit for sexual harassment on October 24, 2007 (captioned Curry, Knable, & Raddatz v. Chateau Del Mar, Inc., Steven Gianakas, and Hickory Properties, Inc., No. 07 C 6021), Chateau Del Mar and Steven Gianakas sued them in Illinois state court. Their seven-count complaint alleged a wide variety of claimed wrongs, including, but not limited to, physical and mental injuries, “tripping and pushing Gianakas,” breach of fiduciary duty, and destroying property. (Chateau Del Mar and Steven P. Gianakas v. Knable, et al, Circuit Court of Cook County No. 2007L012463.)

“This serious and ongoing harassment of women was unconscionable enough. Then these defendants made a bad situation worse by punishing the victims for engaging in protected activity,” said EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru. “This kind of retaliation is plainly illegal, even if it is cleverly disguised as a supposedly legitimate lawsuit.”

An EEOC investigation determined that there was reasonable cause to believe that the women were sued because they exercised their federally protected rights to protest discrimination. The circuit court of Cook County dismissed the lawsuit Chateau Del Mar and Gianakas had filed. Thereafter, the EEOC filed a second lawsuit on September 22, 2008 against Chateau Del Mar for retaliation. The three individual private plaintiffs intervened in the EEOC’s retaliation case, and all three suits were docketed as related cases before U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer.

Continue reading "Hickory Hills Country Club To Pay $690,000 To Settle EEOC Sexual Harassment, Retaliation and Racial Discrimination Lawsuit" »

West Front Street Foods, a North Carolina supermarket has agreed to pay $30,000 to settle an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") lawsuit involving a white member of staff being allegedly racially discriminated against.

The EEOC alleged that West Front Street Foods fired a white, non-Hispanic meat cutter, from a Compare Foods supermarket in Statesville because of his race and national origin and then replaced him with a Hispanic worker.

Along with paying $30,000, West Front Street Foods shall distribute a formal, written anti-discrimination policy; provide periodic training to all its employees on the policy and on federal law's prohibition against national origin and race discrimination; and send periodic reports to the EEOC concerning employees who are fired or resign.

Although the title suggests damages in a sexual harassment case, these damages are also available in most discrimination cases.
1. Economic Damages--consist of back and front pay plus incidentals. Included in this calculation are benefits. Back pay is the amount of money equal to wages an employee would have earned, including all benefits from the date of discharge through the date of final judgment. Front pay is an amount of money equal to wages and benefits the employee will lose in the future because of a lower paying job or no job at all. Incidentals may be relocation costs, education costs for retraining and costs for tools if required at a new position.

2. Emotional Distress Damages--There is new specific formula for this calculation and there are many factors to consider including, the credibility of the employee, length of employment, believeability of witnesses, prior or pre-existing similar injuries, nature and extent of counseling or other medical treatment, and strength of the underlying case.

3. Punitive Damages--Under Title VII and ADA violations punitive damages may be awarded. In order to recover the employee must prove the employer engaged in a discriminatory practice or discriminatory practices with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of the employee, but also that liability for the punitive damages should be imputed to the employer.

4. Attorneys' Fees--All federal anti discrimination statutes and those in Illinois provide for the recovery of attorney fees by the prevailing party. Discretion as to the amount is up to the Judge.

Continue reading "Damages In A Sexual Harassment Case" »

A case involving 149 Hispanic warehouse workes has been settled. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") and B & H Foto and Electronics Corp. ("B & H") agreed to resolve a national origin discrimination lawsuit filed by the EEOC on behalf of 149 Hispanic warehouse workers at one of the largest retail sellers of photographic, computer and electronic equipment in New York. B&H will pay $4.3 million to settle the case.

The EEOC's lawsuit alleged that B & H paid Hispanic workers in its warehouses in Manhattan and Brooklyn less than non-Hispanic workers and failed to promote them or provide health benefits because of their national origin. Along with the settlement, the parties agreed to injunctive relief requiring B & H to equalize the wages of Hispanic employees to their non-Hispanic coworkers, conduct employer training, adopt an anti-discrimination policy, post EEOC notices, report to the EEOC, and to be monitored by the EEOC for the next five years.

Continue reading "Hispanic Workers Awarded $4.3 Millinion in Discrimination Case" »

Four female stock brokers sued Citigroup Global Markets Inc. alleging gender discrimination. So, Varner, Orlando and Amochaev, all earned less than their male counterparts and had fewer assets to manage and fewer opportunities to earn more income. The females complained to the company's human resources department about the firms discrimination actions.

The four females filed a lawsuit alleging Citi intentionally maintains policies that lock in, perpetuate, and increase gender discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e and California Civil Rights Laws. So also alleged race discrimination under Title VII.

Citi responded that there was no difference in treatment between the male and female employees. The parties settled before trial for $33 million plus interest. Citi also agreed to institute several anti-discrimination policies.

Robin Korherr filed a complaint Sept. 12, 2007, with the Division of Human Rights, alleging sexual harassment, gender discrimination, racial discrimination and retaliation. The Division of Human Rights later found probable cause in the case. Korherr worked June 2003 to August 2007 at the sheriff's office as Sheriff Meskill's confidential secretary. Korherr, also a member of Ithaca Common Council representing the city's Fifth Ward, alleges sexual harassment and retaliation from April 2005 to August 2007.

Korherr claims the sexual harassment began in 2005 when she was going through a divorce. Korherr says on several occasions, Meskill tried to kiss and grope her. Korherr testified that she approached her boss numerous times to rectify the situation and the sheriff would apologize initially, but become aggressive again and continued with the alleged behavior through his re-election in 2006. She also claims she received dozens of drunken phone calls from him.

Korherr says Meskill made it impossible for her to work by taking away her privileges and enforcing new rules and believes it was retaliation, saying it was because "I wouldn't sleep with him."

Nordstrom, Inc. will pay $292,500 to 10 former employees and furnish other remedial measures to settle a harassment lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). The EEOC had alleged that the department store manager harassed Hispanic and black employees based on their national origin, engaged in racial discrimination and retaliated against those who complained about the harassment.

According to the EEOC's lawsuit, an alterations department manager at Nordstrom complained that she "hate[d] Hispanics," and that Hispanics were "lazy" and "ignorant." Hispanic tailors were chastised by the alterations manager for speaking to each other in Spanish. The same manager made other derogatory remarks such as "I don't like blacks" and "you're black, you stink." These types of comments are a clear violation of federal law and will always subject a company to liability. Harassment based on national origin, race, and color violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

"Employers must act swiftly to correct harassment and prevent abusive conduct," said EEOC Regional Attorney Nora E. Curtin. "Instead of dealing with the despicable racial and ethnic comments, Nordstrom management allowed the harasser to retaliate against the employees for complaining."

Continue reading " Nordstrom Pays $292,500 To Settle EEOC Discrimination Lawsuit" »

Skilled Healthcare Group will pay up to $450,000 and offer remedial relief to settle a lawsuit alleging discrimination in penalizing the company's Hispanic workers in California and Texas for speaking Spanish in their workplaces. The EEOC Lawsuit alleged Hispanic employees at the company's nursing homes and assisted living facilities were subjected to harassment; and to different terms and conditions of employment, promotion, compensation and treatment because of an English-only rule enforced only against Hispanics, which is a form of racial discrimination.

The EEOC found that 53 current and former Hispanic workers were subjected to the different treatment and harassment. The EEOC said some workers were prohibited from speaking Spanish to Spanish-speaking residents of the facilities and were disciplined for speaking Spanish in the parking lots while on breaks.

"As our country's workforce becomes increasingly diverse, employers must be vigilant in ensuring that if English-only rules are necessary, they are not discriminatory," EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru.

Continue reading "Skilled Healthcare Group Pays $450,000 To Settle EEOC Lawsuit Over Discrimination" »

The Illinois Supreme Court held in Blount v. Stroud, 2009 WL 153862 (Ill Sup Ct. 2009) that the Illinois Human Rights Act ("Act") doesn't preclude employees who file a claim under the Human Rights Act from bringing other claims based on common law, or federal statutes in state court.

Background

Jerri Blount filed a multicount complaint in Cook County Circuit Court against her former employer Jovon Broadcasting Corporation and the owner and general manager. The two counts of interest to his analysis were her common law retaliatory discharge and retaliation under 42 USC Section 1981. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss claiming the Act precluded her from filing in the circuit court. The court rejected the motion to dismiss and she was ultimately awarded over $3 million dollars by a jury. The appellate court reversed holding the Act deprives Illinois Courts of subject matter jurisdiction. The Illinois Supreme Court heard the case and ruled that whether facts giving rise to a civil rights violation as defined under state law might also give rise to a civil rights violation under definitions found in federal statutes was not relevant and Blount had a right to pursue her claim under federal law in state circuit court.

The racial comments began on Gary Redd’s first day on the job in Kennesaw’s public works department and they never let up according to his lawsuit. Redd, a native of Korea, said he was called “wetback,” “rice-eater” and “slant-eye.” Two years later, in 2008, he couldn’t take the racial harassment any longer and quit--which is referred to as constructive discharge.

Willie Smith says he has endured racist behavior since he was hired by Kennesaw in 1995. In 1996, he complained about nooses hanging from two city trucks. He says racial slurs like the n-word was used regularly by bosses and co-workers, and a “White Only” sign was taped to a bathroom stall.

Before retiring, the head of the public works department, Woody McFarlin, posted a picture of the old Georgia flag with a slice of watermelon on it. The caption read: “Now, here’s a flag that will appeal to ALL Georgians!” Smith kept reporting the racist behavior. “I couldn’t ever get nothing resolved,” he said.

Smith, Redd and Stanley Mitchell, a 22-year public works employee, filed a racial discrimination and harassment lawsuit against Kennesaw on March 9, 2009.

“I felt like something had to be done to stop this, so it wouldn’t go on with future generations,” Redd said.

N-W ventures, the owner of several restaurants in three states will pay $457,500 to settle a race discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). The EEOC had charged that N-W Ventures, LLC in Las Vegas subjected a class of African American employees to discrimination, including racial harassment and retaliation. The EEOC alleges eight black employees and other similarly situated individuals were forced to endure racist epithets and insults on many occasions. When some employees complained, managers retaliated against them by instructing supervisors to “get something on them, whether true or not,” and then firing them because of their race and as retaliation for the complaints.

Besides paying $457,500 to the discrimination victims, N-M Ventures LLC is prohibited from discriminating based on race, and from retaliating against any employee because he or she opposed discrimination. Further, the company must establish an appropriate and effective mechanism for handling complaints of discrimination, and provide training for its managers and employees with respect to the law against racial discrimination and harassment and retaliation at its Las Vegas facility.

Continue reading "Restaurant Chain $457,500 to settle EEOC race discrimination lawsuit " »

Five former employees of Grizzly Jack's Grand Bear Lodge in Utica Illinois, Leno Campbell, Suzanne Czarnecki, Michael DeLap, Mark Low and Lisa Meyers filed a lawsuit in federal court claiming sexual harassment, racial discrimination and gender discrimination. The lodge's owners are Joseph Hook, Keith and Susan Wolick. The lawsuit also alleges the owners fostered an environment in which sexual harassment of female employees by the male owners was common.

Campbell, an african-american, was the lodge's director of housekeeping and is claiming the owners discriminated against him because of his race including that Wolick often made remarks critical of blacks to other employees and to Campbell himself. Czarnecki the former resort's revenue manager, and Meyers a former reservationist are claiming they were discriminated against because they were women and also allege Hook made sexual remarks and committed assault and battery against them, in that he made physical contact of a sexual nature without their consent.

The resorts attorney Mike Moody had this to say about the lawsuit:

"After an exhaustive investigation by the (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) in which Grand Bear cooperated and steadfastly defended against these false charges, the EEOC terminated its investigation and filed no charges against Grand Bear. Grand Bear has every confidence that it will be vindicated in a court of law and denies that it discriminated against anyone in any way."

However, Plaintiff's attorney Erika Pedersen responded by stating:

““The EEOC terminated its investigation of the claims against Grand Bear only because we, the plaintiffs, asked it to. We wanted to advance the litigation to federal court so we asked the EEOC to issue our clients their Notices of Right to Sue, which it is obligated to do. The EEOC made no finding either way and nothing about that process can or should be interpreted as a reflection on the merits of the claims or defenses. The allegations are very disturbing and serve as a reminder that sexual and racial harassment are still significant problems for many employees in this country. Each of our clients hopes that by bringing these claims, the working environment becomes better for current and future employees of Grand Bear and elsewhere.”

By way of background victims of discrimination must first file with the EEOC before they can file in court. In this case it was the intention of the Plaintiffs to proceed to federal court rather than wait for the EEOC to complete its investigation, which can take years. The Plaintiffs fulfilled their obligation by filing charges first with the EEOC and once they exhausted the administrative process, proceeded to court by filing their lawsuit.

Continue reading "Discrimination Lawsuit Filed Against Grizzly Jack's Grand Bear Lodge " »

According to government statistics, in the last ten years the number of retaliation charges filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") have increased by 33%, while other charges filed with the EEOC have only increased 2.5%. Under federal law (Title VII), retaliation occurs when an employee is fired or has his/her terms and conditions of work changed as a result of making a formal complaint of discrimination. Title VII also protects those individuals who testify, assist or participate in an investigation of illegal activity or those who oppose unlawful employment practices.

In a recent United States Supreme Court case, CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries, 128 S. Ct. 1951 (2008), an employee alleged he was terminated for complaining to management that a black co-worker had been fired for racial reasons which amounted to racial discrimination. The Court concluded 7-2 that if this allegation were true it was actionable and that retaliation claims are included under 42 U.S.C. § 1981.

The important point in this case is that when filing a Title VII race discrimination charge, always include a retaliation charge as well because even if the race discrimination charge is unsuccessful, the retaliation charge may succeed and if it does, there will not be any caps on the liability to the employer.

The state of Washington agreed to pay $800,000 to three women to settle a sexual harassment and discrimination lawsuit against the Department of Labor and Industries. Two of the women, Linda Bang and Janis Fleming, remain at the office. The third, Mercy Fernandez-Figueroa, left the job because of the stress of the harassment. According to the lawsuit Phillip Scott, a co-worker of the women, and Carter Mitchell, a supervisor, harassed and intimidated the women. In addition their manager, Gail Hughes, retaliated against the women according to the lawsuit. The three women reported their concerns to upper management and then Hughes their manager branded them as troublemakers, took away their job privileges, and criticized job performance despite no change in performance according to the News Tribune.

In the lawsuit the women claim the harassment began with Scott and Mitchell making sexual comments, sexual gestures and giving disparate treatment to them. The lawsuit claims Mitchell made unwanted contact with Fernandez-Figueroa as he would rub his genitalia on her leg during an unwanted hug and dry-humped her chair while she sat in it. Additionally, Fernandez-Figueroa reported an e-mail from an unnamed co-worker denigrating her ethnic background, and when she complained to management was told she had to expect that because she was the office’s token Hispanic--which would constitute racial discrimination.

Continue reading "Tacoma Department of Labor & Industries Settles Sexual Harassment Case for $800,000" »

Lawyer Henry Har filed a multi-count lawsuit against Nixon Peabody LLP in Los Angeles claiming discrimination based on gender, race, sex and national origin. In his lawsuit Har claims his former employer made derogatory comments toward women, homosexuals and minorities. Har claims his co-workers asked him if the office administrator had given him oral sex and made other homophobic comments throughout his employment.

Har who is asian-american claims disparate treatment based on his ethnicity and claims he was treated different that white employees. Disparate treatment bases the claim on whether the claimant was treated different than other employees who are similarly situated. In International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States, 431 U.S. 324 (1997), the United States Supreme Court held that disparate treatment occurs when "the employer simply treats some people less favorably than others because of their race, color, religion, sex or national origin."

Har claims he suffered great mental suffering, severe emotional distress, psychological trauma and profound humiliation. He is seeking damages to compensate for his lost earning and benefits, punitive damages for wilful and wanton conduct and other compensatory damages as well as attorney fees.

The fastest growing sport in history, NASCAR settled a $225 million dollar sexual harassment lawsuit yesterday, the terms of which are confidential. Former NASCAR official Mauricia Grant said she was subjected to racial discrimination and sexual harassment when she worked as a technical inspector responsible for certifying cars in NASCAR's second-tier Nationwide Series from January 2005 until her termination in October 2007.

In her lawsuit she alleged 23 specific incidents of sexual harassment and 34 specific incidents of racial and gender discrimination. Among Grant's racial discrimination claims, she said she was referred to as "Nappy Headed Mo" and "Queen Sheba," by co-workers, was often told she worked on "colored people time," and was frightened by one official who routinely made Ku Klux Klan references. Grant also said she was subjected to graphic and lewd jokes and sexual advances from male co-workers, two of whom allegedly exposed themselves to her. After an investigation by NASCAR officials of Grant's claims the two male co-workers who allegedly exposed themselves to her were fired.

The settlement was reached after twelve hours of mediation earlier this month in New York. The mediation session was suggested by U.S. District Court Judge Deborah A. Batts after the first court appearance in what was expected to be a multi-year battle between the two sides.

Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII applies to employers with 15 or more employees, including state and local governments. It also applies to employment agencies and to labor organizations, as well as to the federal government. The victim as well as the harasser may be a woman or a man. The victim does not have to be of the opposite sex. The harasser can be the victim's supervisor, an agent of the employer, a supervisor in another area, a co-worker, or a non-employee. The victim does not have to be the person harassed but could be anyone affected by the offensive conduct. Unlawful sexual harassment may occur without economic injury to or discharge of the victim. The harasser's conduct must be unwelcome.

Continue reading "NASCAR Settles Sexual Harassment Lawsuit" »