Illinois Sexual Harassment Attorney Blog

A college student at the University of Iowa settled her sexual harassment lawsuit for $130,000. According to published documents, the University settled the case in order to move forward and put this behind them. The professor accused of the sexual harassment, Arthur Miller, committed suicide after being charged criminally in this case. He apparently would ask female students to show their breasts and do other sexual type activity in return for good grades. He seemed to target seniors who would be moving out of state after they graduated. This type of activity is very troubling.

When one of the college students came forward and complained the university tried to sweep the matter under the rug. As is typical in these types of investigations the university offers a nominal amount to settle the case. They initially offered $1,000 to settle the sexual harassment case. Talk about an insult. It is amazing that the university actually offered this low amount. You can see why it is very important to get an attorney involved in this type of case early. Protect your rights if you are a student in school and the victim of sexual harassment. In this case the professor was engaging in retaliation also because he changed the grade of one student from an A to a B after she complained about the sexual harassment.

The Los Angeles City Fire Department pays $494,150 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit. According to published accounts firefighter Anthony Almeida was sexually harassed and complained to management. After management refused to intervene he went to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") who filed a complaint on his behalf. The allegations included deeply offensive comments of a sexual and religious nature. The behavior of the co-workers was very cruel and has no place in the workplace.

The problem started when Almeida filed a lawsuit against the Catholic Church regarding sexual abuse he suffered by a priest. One coworker learned that Almeida had filed a lawsuit against the Catholic Church over the abuse, and several coworkers mocked him for that, using explicit and offensive religious and sexual epithets. To make matters worse management engaged in retaliation against Almeida in the form of discipline for his participation in another equal employment opportunity investigation. You can see how much money this type of behavior can cost.

“We are pleased that the Los Angeles City Fire Department is demonstrating its commitment toward creating a workplace free of harassment and retaliation,” said EEOC attorney Olophius Perry.

Findlay Honda will pay $150,000 to settle a retaliation and racial discrimination lawsuit. The lawsuit was first filed on behalf of to two black employees by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to published accounts a parts department manager made racially derogatory comments and jokes on a near-daily basis to the two black employees. I know it is hard to believe this type of behavior takes place but it does. Not only did that happen but he also imposed stricter work-related rules on black employees. This type of discrimination is referred to as different terms and conditions.

Two black employees were eventually fired, one after communicating that he was going to file a discrimination charge against the company. This is referred to as retaliation. If you have a negative job action taken against you after complaining about discrimination you have a valid retaliation claim. The amount paid by the company shows they realize they did something wrong and want this to go away. I am glad the EEOC made the company pay up and helped the two workers get some satisfaction.

“We commend Shack-Findlay Automotive for taking proactive measures to ensure a workplace free of discrimination,” said EEOC attorney Anna Y. Park

My Chicago offices gets calls all the time from people who report sexual harassment at work and then get fired. Sometimes they don't get fired but get demoted or the boss starts to really put the screws to them. In any event they get a negative job action after reporting the sexual harassment. In Illinois this is referred to as retaliation. If this happens to you at work, you can file a complaint with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR"). The IDHR is tasked with investigating complaints of sexual harassment, retaliation and other forms of discrimination. There are strict time limits for reporting the activity so it is important that you act fast. Don't forget to save as much evidence as possible. This means printing out email's and text messages before they are erased.

The IDHR isn't tasked with anything more than investigation the complaint. If the investigator finds substantial evidence, you can then file a complaint with the Illinois Human Rights Commission ("IHRC") where you will have your trial in front of an administrative law judge. The IHRC can be a very tricky place and it takes experience to navigate. The important thing is at the IHRC you need evidence to prove your case. It is important to have an organized plan of attack.

Matrix, L.L.C. pays $450,000 to a class of 15 former employees to settle a racial discrimination and retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was first filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the employees. According to published accounts Matrix officials told white supervisor Barbara Palermi not to hire any more black cleaners. When Palermi hired additional black cleaners based on their qualifications to do the job, Matrix dismissed her in retaliation for opposing the company’s racial discrimination. It is amazing that this type of activity still exists in the United States--but it does.

The EEOC alleged that Matrix management officials also discriminated against the black cleaners by insisting they sit in the back of the cafeteria during break times. At one point they even forbid them from using the cafeteria at all. To make matters worse and in an amazing turn of events Matrix fired all of the employees at the worksite and replaced them with an entirely non-black cleaning crew.

“We commend the company for its agreement to carry out the significant equitable relief provided in the consent decree, including providing expansive annual training, which will benefit all company employees,” said EEOC Attorney Spencer H. Lewis, Jr.

In Chicago there seems to be a rise in the number of sexual harassment cases between employees and members of senior management. Senior management can include owners, CEO's and COO's. Many times employees are reluctant to come forward because they feel the other person is too powerful and is beyond being controlled. They feel if it comes down to it, they will be fired--and if they are it would be retaliation under the Illinois Human Rights Act. This would only makes matters worse for the company and subject the company to additional liability. The important thing is to come forward and not let these senior managers get away with what they are doing.

In Chicago the job market is tight and people are afraid of rocking the boat for fear of losing their job. However, if someone is going to engage in sexual harassment do you really think they are beyond firing you if you reject them? Of course they will do whatever they deem necessary to protect their own interests. Filing a complaint of sexual harassment with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") is a good first step in stopping the harassment and protecting your rights. If they fire you for filing the complaint with the IDHR you then have an additional charge of discrimination based on retaliation. So firing actually gives you some protection. It is very important to protect your rights and take action if you are the victim of sexual harassment at work.

In Illinois there is strict liability on the company if a supervisor or person in authority engages in sexual harassment. However if the sexual harassment if from a non-supervisor then liability doesn't attach unless the company is notified and fails to take corrective action. So what type of defenses will a company engage in once you bring a complaint of sexual harassment? The most common is that the conduct doesn't rise to the level of harassment because both parties were engaged in it. This is also known as consent by the victim. The company will usually show an email or text message that shows some friendly comment in an attempt to prove their theory. Remember if the person is your supervisor of course you may have friendly comments to him, are you suppose to say unfriendly things to him?

The second most common defense is that the conduct really doesn't rise to the level of sexual harassment. So the company will say, yes the conduct was inappropriate but it wasn't harsh enough to warrant a sexual harassment complaint. The third defense is that the employee is not a good worker and is just using the sexual harassment charge as a way of diverting attention away from herself. This is the defense where the victim usually gets terminated based on some trumped up charge. This also allows the employee to file an additional complaint of retaliation. You were late to work three times or you made a mistake on your work. Of course other employees missed the same amount of work and they didn't get fired. If this happens to you, call an employment lawyer and protect your rights.

What happens when you are the victim of sexual harassment at the hands of your supervisor? As you can imagine it puts you in a very tough position because of the power the supervisor has over you. If you complain and management doesn't do anything what are you going to do? My advice to you is call an employment lawyer and discuss your issue. In Illinois there is strict liability if a person in a position of control engages in sexual harassment with an employee. It is very important to protect your rights and file a complaint with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") within a very short time period.

My Chicago office is very active with the IDHR and i don't charge a fee unless money is recovered. There are ways to draft a sexual harassment complaint that puts pressure on the company to take the complaint seriously. Remember that human resources is not there to protect your rights, it is there to protect the company. Don't let human resources buffalo you into thinking they are handling it in a private fashion. Call an experienced employment lawyer and protect yourself. Many times, the company engages in retaliation when an employee comes forward and complains about sexual harassment. Don't get pushed around by human resources when your supervisor engages in sexual harassment.

M. Slavin & Sons, Ltd., pays $900,000 to settle an employment discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). The lawsuit the was filed on behalf of over 30 black employees. According to published accounts the company created a hostile work environment for the workers based on sexual harassment, national origin, racial discrimination and retaliation.

The company owners and managers harassed the employees making explicit sexual comments and using offensive racial terms such as “n----r” and “African b-----d.” Many of the men endured this treatment because they desperately needed the work.

“Thanks to Kevin Pierson’s EEOC charge and this lawsuit, employees at M. Slavin will now be able to work in an environment free from discrimination,” said EEOC attorney Sunu P. Chandy.

it is unfortunate but true that when most people complain to human resources about sexual harassment the company ends up engaging in retaliation. Instead of investigating the complaint and taking action the company takes the blame the victim policy. This usually results in a call to my office and the filing of a complaint with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR"). This in turn results in the company spending money on legal fees and usually paying money to settle the case.

I am amazed how often this takes place and why companies just don't address sexual harassment complaints head on. I believe a good deal of this has to do with lack of training and an unrealistic belief that they can sweep the whole thing under the rug. People who have been victimized by sexual harassment deserve help and to be taken seriously. If companies don't wish to take the complaints in a serious fashion they will pay the price down the road.

You are doing a great job at work and things seem to be going good. However you have a co-worker or supervisor that is discriminating against you based on your sexual orientation. You complain about it to human resources but nothing is done to stop it. So what should you do next? The only remaining option is to file a complaint with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR"). Filing a complaint with the IDHR gives you protection and starts an investigation. Remember that the company can sweep an internal investigation under the rug, but they can't control the investigation with the IDHR.

The IDHR can interview witnesses, access documents and put pressure on the company to try and settle the case. These are all good things for a person who is being discriminated against. You can also keep your job while your investigation is being conducted by the IDHR and the company can't engage in retaliation against you because you filed the complaint. Don't go it alone, contact an experienced employment lawyer and get help protecting your rights.

What happens when you complain to the human resource ("HR") manager that your supervisor is engaging in sexual harassment with you? What can you expect from the human resource manager in the way of an investigation? The answer will depend on the company and how serious they take sexual harassment. In most cases the HR manager will talk with you and the person you are accusing--not at the same time. Next the HR manager will talk with people who may have witnessed the sexual harassment. The HR manager may also review email and text messages to try and determine what happened. At the conclusion of this the HR manager will talk with senior management to determine what steps to take next as far as discipline including termination.

The problem with what is written above is many times HR just tries to sweep matters under the rug. They don't wish to get to the truth. If is a senior manager doing the sexual harassment, they would rather do nothing or worse, fire the person being harassed. This is what I call blame the victim. It usually can be called retaliation and can be the basis for a complaint with the Illinois Department of Human Rights. It is very important to seek legal help once you are the victim of sexual harassment because HR is paid by the company and their loyalty is with the company. Don't be fooled into thinking HR is looking out for your best interest.

Sexual harassment in Chicago is a growing problem. Because employees are making less money and are afraid to lose their job they put up with more than they usually would. And it seems managers think they can do more to employees. I get many calls about managers who are trying to have sex with their employees and making them feel like they will be fired if they don't go along with it. This is commonly known as retaliation. In Illinois this is illegal and a violation of the Illinois Human Rights Act ("IHRA").

In Chicago I file complaints of sexual harassment with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR"). The complaints basically allege violations of the IHRA and the damages that I can ask for include, lost back wages, lost future wages, attorney fees, medical bills and money for emotional distress. It is very important for people to realize they must file a complaint within a short period of time or they will be prohibited because of the statute of limitations. It is imperative to speak with an employment attorney at your earliest.

Usually when a person complains about sexual harassment in the workplace the victim ends up getting the raw end of the stick. For some unknown reason, management ends up blaming the victim and engages in retaliation. The retaliation can come in many forms. Everything from demotion, termination or just ignoring the conduct so that the person must endure even more sexual harassment. It is very important to document everything that is taking place at work to increase your chances of success.

My Chicago office handles many sexual harassment cases and I usually file at the Illinois Department of Human rights ("IDHR"). There is a strict time limit when filing a complaint at the IDHR so you must act fast and seek legal advice immediately. There are other reasons to act fast including drafting your complaint to human resources in just he right way. Remember that management is looking out for the best interest of the company and you need someone to look out for your best interest. Don't count of management; protect yourself.

Lakemont Homes, Inc. pays $267,000 to settle a class sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was first filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), on behalf of multiple female employees. According to published accounts four female employees of the company endured vulgar sexual comments and unwanted propositions by a male lead sales agent. The women did not want to engage in sex and repeatedly told the male they were not interested.

In a shocking allegation the lead agent asked one of the women to have sex with him, even threatening her life at gunpoint. This is just crazy. I can't believe people actually act like this in the workplace. The women complained to management but nothing was done to stop it. Instead the women were retaliated against for reporting the conduct in the form of unfavorable scheduling and poor performance evaluations. And what happens all too often the women were forced to quit while the harasser remained employed. When an employee is forced to quit because of discrimination it is referred to as a constructive discharge.

“While we commend Lakemont for taking measures to resolve this matter, we hope more employers recognize that they must deal with workplace harassment quickly and effectively,” said EEOC attorney Anna Park.

I get calls from people who have cases at the Illinois Human Rights Commission ("IHRC") regarding how to proceed with discovery. My first piece of advice is to tell them to hire an experienced employment lawyer. Discovery is where a case can be won or lost. It is also instrumental in getting information that will lead to a good settlement. For example if you have a sexual orientation or sexual harassment case pending before the IHRC, you would want to get evidence the other side has of the discrimination. A good starting point would be text messages and emails that were uncovered by the company investigation.

Usually if you file an internal complaint of discrimination the company will do some sort of internal investigation. Documents uncovered during the investigation may be very relevant to your case. The documents get even more important if the company engages in retaliation against you after you complain about the sexual harassment or sexual orientation discrimination. There are no short cuts when it comes to discovery and how clever and complete your discovery requests are may decide how much money you end up with in your pocket.

Imperial Security, Inc. agreed to settle a religious discrimination lawsuit for $50,000. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Julie Holloway-Russell. According to published accounts Imperial refused to accommodate the religious beliefs of Russell, who is Muslim. In fact to make matters worse they actually terminated her. This type of activity is also known as retaliation because she complained about being discriminated against.

Russell wore a khimar, which is a religious garb which covers her hair, ears, and neck, as required by her religious beliefs. She wore this when she interviewed for the job of security guard so the company was well aware that she wore this daily. The problem started when she reported to her first work assignment wearing her khima and was told to remove it. She refused to do so because her religious beliefs mandated that she wear the religious head covering. She was terminated at that point.

“The 21st century workplace is increasingly diverse and the resolution of this lawsuit should remind all companies of their legal obligation to provide a reasonable accommodation of an employee’s religious beliefs.”said EEOC District Director Spencer H. Lewis, Jr.

MMS Resources, Inc. pays $365,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit. The sexual harassment lawsuit was first filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a class of female workers. According to published accounts the president of the company Pat Reed did the sexual harassment. The sexual harassment included sexual comments and touching. In a shocking allegation Reed also had coerced sexual intercourse with employees.

If the employees didn't go along with the sex Reed threatened retaliation. The women were threatened with losing their jobs, raises, promotions or other employment opportunities in the community, if they complained at all. This type of behavior is unreal and I can't believe he actually did this. I am glad the EEOC held the company to a higher standard and made them pay this much money. In the future I hope this guy isn't anywhere near women.

“Employees should be free from harassment based upon their gender, and those who complain about such misconduct should not be in fear of losing their jobs,” said EEOC attorney Webster N. Smith.

My Chicago office handles many types of discrimination cases. One question that I get asked often is what happens after I file a discrimination case with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR")? Does the IDHR try the case and give a verdict? The answer is no. The IDHR investigates the complaint and if there is substantial evidence allows you to file directly with the Illinois Human Rights Commission ("IHRC") for trial. So in fact the IDHR acts as a gate keeper for the IHRC. This keeps the number of cases down so the IHRC doesn't get overwhelmed with cases.

Of course the down side is many times the investigators at the IDHR try to try the case and issue their own verdict so to speak. It is very important to hire someone experienced when taking a case to the IHRC because cases can be won and lost during discovery. Many sexual harassment cases that I file at the IHRC are settled because the other side doesn't want damaging or embarrassing details coming out about what really happened at the company. Additionally, many sexual harassment cases also include a claim for retaliation and companies don't want those details emerging either. It is in your best interest to proceed before the Illinois Human Rights Commission with caution and in my opinion with the help of an experienced employment lawyer.

Koper Furniture, Inc. pays $40,000 to settle a retaliation lawsuit. The retaliation was based on an employee complaining to management about discrimination based on color and then being fired. The lawsuit was first filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of employee Jose Guadalupe. Usually in cases like this the EEOC tries to settle the case before filing a lawsuit but sometimes it takes the lawsuit to get the parties to settle.

For some unknown reasons many companies fire employees who complain about various types of discrimination. The smartest thing to do would be to investigate the claim and take action against the employee who is engaging in this type of conduct. I am baffled why the company always wants to shoot the messenger. But in the end, justice prevails and the company had to pay up.

“We are delighted that this resolution addresses the systemic problems at this workplace that facilitated the discriminatory misconduct,” said EEOC attorney Malcolm S. Medley.

Mobile Community Action, Inc. settles a retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to published accounts the company fired Donte Bumpers after he opposed sexual harassment. The accounts claims that Bumpers was exposed to numerous instances of unwelcome and offensive sexual remarks by a femal supervisor. This is less common than male supervisors sexually harsassing female workers but it happens. the supervisor also would physically touch Bumpers and he resisted at all times.

Because he would not go along with this activity the supervisor required him to perform demeaning personal tasks unassociated with his job responsibilities in retaliation. Bumpers complained about this type of behavior and was immediately terminated. This is the basis of his retalitation claim. I see more of this activity now that the economy is down and people are afraid of losing their jobs. This case was settled for $65,000 plus attorney fees which could bring the total to six figures.

“This settlement further illustrates the fact that sexual harassment in the workplace is not gender-specific,” said EEOC AttorneyDelner Franklin-Thomas.

American Laser Centers ("ALC") pays $125,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was first filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") after initial settlement talks broke down. The sexual harassment started when female workers were harassed by the landlord the the building. The sexual harassment included unwelcome touching, sexual advances and appearances in their work area by the visibly aroused landlord. The landlord also made very disturbing comments to the workers.

The sexual harassment got so bad one female brought her brother to work for protection.
When the women came forward to management nothing was done to stop the harassment and negative job actions ended up taking place against the females. This is the basis for the retaliation claim. Hopefully the company learned its lesson and will train the management employees better in the future.

“Workers absolutely have the legal right to report harassment or discrimination suffered at work without repercussion." Said EEOC attorney Melissa Barrios

Jay Medicar Transportation, LLC pays $70,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed in federal court by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of female employees who alleged they were sexually harassed by a senior manager. According to published accounts the Chicago based company had a former management employee who thought he could make women have sex with him in exchange for work related favors. This type of activity is called quid pro quo. It just means that the person is trying to get something for something. The senior manager was telling the women they could get pay raises, or scheduling changes if they had sex with him. He even went so far as to tell them they could be fired if they didn't have sex with him.

One of the discrimination victims alleged the company terminated her on pretextual grounds, rehired her, and then subjected her to adverse terms and conditions of employment as retaliation for her prior complaints of sexual harassment. This type of activity is known as retaliation and is a separate discrimination charge. This manager is no longer working for the company and hopefullly this type of activity won't take place in the future.

“This case alleged that Jay Medicar allowed a high-ranking manager to abuse his position of power by demanding sex in exchange for promotions, schedule changes, and job security,” said EEOC attorney John Hendrickson

Chicago is seeing an increase in the number of sexual harassment cases being filed with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR"). My office in Chicago is mirroring this fact as well. There are many reasons for the increase in cases being filed. Many employers are feeling powerful because of the current job market. They believe they can get away with thing and conduct they normally wouldn't try to get away with. They also believe employee are too afraid of losing their jobs to complain if they are the victim of sexual harassment. They seem to be wrong on both counts. People are sticking up for their rights and they are not letting these companies push them around.

I believe that as long as people fight for their rights and don't let these companies push them around the workplace will become better for all employees. Every employee in Illinois has guaranteed rights which are not only granted by the Illinois Constitution but also by the Illinois Human Rights Act. Usually there are other forms of discrimination taking place along with the sexual harassment. The most common are retaliation and the creation of a hostile work environment.

What happens if you are the victim of sexual harassment at work, but the sexual harassment consists of comments only? Do you have a legitimate sexual harassment case? The short answer is yes you do. One issue you may have is proving the comments were said to you. Of course you can testify that you heard the comments and you can expect the person saying them to deny it. There may also be circumstances where a third party overheard the comments--which would be very helpful. You may also send an email to the person making the comments asking him if you heard him correctly? If he responds, you have printed evidence, if he doesn't respond, it also looks odd that he would not deny saying the comments--so again you would have some printed evidence.

If other employees overhear the sexual harassing comments and are truthful with management or human resources about what was said and they are threatened with a negative job action, they will have a claim of retaliation. Many times, the people who are honest and truthful get fired or demoted and don't realize they have rights and protections under the law in Illinois. Don't be afraid to speak the truth and hold harassing people and the companies they work for accountable.

The U.S Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Belinda Egan vs. Freedom Bank et al., is allowing the retaliation lawsuit to go forward. In a mixed ruling for Egan she lost on two other counts but at least won on the retaliation clam. According to published accounts Ms. Egan was recruited to become Vice-President of retail banking at Freedom Bank in July 2007. In September of that year, after a bank director made an unwelcome sexual advance, she complained to the bank's vp of human resources about the sexual harassment. In what shows that she was telling the truth the company investigated and the director resigned.

Meanwhile, Egan was terminated under the guise of an elimination of her person. The negative job action came after a short period of time of complaining of sexual harassment thereby raising the inference of retaliation. Egan filed a lawsuit in federal court alleging retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. She also added two additional counts to the lawsuit, one for a hostile work environment and one for gender discrimination. The lower federal court granted the bank summary judgment dismissing the charges and the case went to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

The Court said "that the company hired four other persons in the first few months of Barajas's tenure. And Egan had no performance issues.”

Roberts Truck Centers settles a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit for $300,000 after the case was filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a class of female workers. According to published accounts Larry Leyva, subjected Katherine Abernathy and three other women to sexual harassment. When sexual harassment is against so many different women there has to be a real lack of management in this orgainization. How can all of this take place and nobody is noticing what is going on? I guess the organization just kept on trucking.

To make matters worse, Abernathy suffered retaliation for complaining about the sexual harassment and was fired after asking that the sexual harassment stop. When an employee complains about discrimination and is then fired, it is called retaliation. This company seems like it doesn't have a clue when it comes to the rights of workers. The EEOC was vigilant and made sure the company had to compensate the workers that were subjected to the sexual harassment.

“Employers must constantly remind their managers of their obligation to maintain workplaces where employees are not subjected to illegal harassment or retaliation.” said EEOC Attorney Mary Jo O’Neill.

Many times in the workplace an employee will go to human resources and file a sexual harassment complaint. As part of the investigation, human resources will contact other employees and try to determine what is going on. But often human resources has an agenda. They don't want to find out what is really going on, they want to make the whole thing go away. Employees who cooperate with the investigation may be subjected to a hostile work environment by telling the truth. This happens when the employee suddenly finds herself being targeted by the company.

Any employee who cooperates in a truthful manner with management during an investigation is protected from retaliation or any negative job action. It is very important for employees to understand their rights in this regard. Remember the company is always looking out for itself, they aren't necessarily looking out for your best interests.

The explosion in the use of text messages has been good for plaintiff's in sexual harassment lawsuits for a number of reasons. First, the text message will show the numbers sent from and sent to. For the most part this leaves it clear that the message was sent by a certain person's phone. And it is an uphill battle to claim your phone sent the message but you did not. Second, the words written will speak for themselves. For example, it will be hard for a supervisor to explain why he was texting you dirty messages at eleven o'clock at night. I find text messages make it easy to settle sexual harassment lawsuits because the other side can see the evidence and they realize they are in a bad position.

It is very important that you save the text messages on your phone or print them out. Don't think that you can delete them and then have the cellular telephone company retrieve them. They can't and won't. All they can do is show a text was sent at a certain time and to what number the text message was sent or received. If you do happen to delete the text message you can still retrieve them with the proper software. My Chicago office handles these types of cases often. It is very important to seek an experienced employment lawyer early in the process to help you with your sexual harassment case. Many times an employee is the victim of retaliation when she reports sexual harassment to management. Remember, the company has people looking out for their best interest--do you?

Aqua Tri settles a sexual harassment lawsuit for $462,500. The lawsuit also alleged retaliation and constructive discharge. The lawsuit was first filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a class of hispanic workers. According to published accounts, supervisors subjected at least eight Hispanic female employees to a sexually hostile work environment which included inappropriate touching, pressuring them for dates and sex. This kind of behavior is not acceptable and will cost a company a great deal of money each time.

The female workers reported the sexual harassment to management but nothing was done to stop it. Some of the females were even told if they had sex with the supervisors they could be promoted. Several employees were either laid off or discharged following an Aqua Tri internal investigation in 2009 due to their perceived support of the victims’ claims. It is illegal to take a negative job action against any employee who participates in a discrimination investigation.

“We commend Aqua Tri for implementing aggressive injunctive relief measures to ensure this will not happen again,” said EEOC attorney Anna Park.

The Doctors Company ("TDC"), settles sexual harassment lawsuit for $230,000. The sexual harassment lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a young administrative assistant named Kimber Thompson. Thompson was sexually harassed by her direct supervisor on a daily basis. According to published accounts the sexual harassment included inappropriate comments about her appearance, inappropriate text messages and e-mails.

In a real ironic twist the company provided anti-sexual harassment training and once realizing that she had rights, Thompson then reported this conduct to management. She even brought along a co-worker as a witness to the sexual harassment which included physical touching. As is typical these days with many companies the company began to hyper-scrutinize the work of the two women and subsequently fired both of them. In Illinois this is considered retaliation and is actionable.

EEOC Attorney William R. Tamayo said, “We hope that this case serves as a reminder to employers to address complaints of harassment and take measures to prevent retaliation."

Lowe’s Home Centers, Inc. pays $120,000 to settle a religious discrimination and retaliation lawsuit. The discrimination lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") after Lowes refused to reasonably accommodate the sincerely held religious belief of an employee. Under the law a company must allow for a reasonable accommodation for religious beliefs that are true and honest.

In this case the worker requested being excused from working on the Christian Sabbath. This doesn't sound like a big deal and the company should have just allowed the man the day off. Instead the company retaliated against him when it scheduled him to work on the Sabbath for 27 out of 28 weeks. Try explaining that one to St. Peter at the gate.

"This settlement ensures that this employee will continue to receive the accommodation he should have been granted to begin with, and that managers and human resource personnel understand heir obligations under the law,” said EEOC Regional Attorney Faye A. Williams.

ABM Industries settles a national origin discrimination lawsuit for $180,000. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") after a thorough investigation by the agency. According to details which were published, supervisors at the company discriminated against Latino janitors by giving them less preferable assignments despite their seniority. In addtion to that, the supervisors removed them from long favored positions. The workers complained about the discriminatory conduct and ABM engaged in retaliation against the men after they filed with the EEOC.

The company should have kept better controls on its supervisors and should have taken the complaints seriously. Once the EEOC got involved the company had to change its' tune and could no longer sweep this under the rug. It has been my experience that companies like to put off doing anything unless forced to.

“We commend the workers who came to us and filed charges, who recognized a problem in their workplace and were willing to come to the EEOC to seek to remedy it. Their coming forward will result in positive changes in the workplace.” said EEOC attorney Michael Baldonado

Allsup’s Convenience Stores, Inc. pays a former employee $37,000 to settle a retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to published accounts Orvel Pape, a manager-in-training who had worked for the company for almost ten years, was fired because he cooperated with an EEOC investigation of another employee’s charge of disability discrimination. There have been recent cases that protect a employee during an investigation. Another words, if the EEOC conducts an investigation, an employee cannot be fired for cooperating with investigators.

These types of cases illustrate that employers have to treat investigations seriously. They can't just threaten or fire employee who do not play ball with the company. They can't force employees to lie and not be truthful to investigators. I see this type of thing all the time where a company tries to strong arm employees. I am glad the EEOC held the companies feet to the fire on this one.

“Mr. Pape, a dedicated ten-year employee, was asked by Allsup’s to speak with an EEOC Investigator about his co-worker’s allegations of discrimination, and was dealt the ultimate punishment for simply following those instructions,” said EEOC Attorney Meaghan Shepard.

AA Enterprises, Inc. pays $80,000 to settle a pregnancy discrimination and retaliation lawsuit. The discrimination lawsuit was first filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of four female employees. According to published accounts regarding the lawsuit, AA required the four females, who were pregnant to pay for their own medical expenses-while other non-pregnant employees did not have to.

In an even more troubling revelation, the pregnant women were threatened with a negative job action in the form of termination if they did not agree to pay for their own medical expenses. Two of the pregnant women ended up being fired after filing a complaint with the EEOC. This type of behavior is illegal and will get a company in trouble every time. In short, a female cannot be treated different just because she is pregnant.

“Pregnancy discrimination is a continuing problem in the CNMI,” said EEOC attorney Anna Y. Park.

Food Management Investors, Inc. (FMI) and Apple Core Enterprises, Inc., doing business as Applebee's Neighborhood Grill & Bar will pay $1 Million to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") after former store manager Mike Cordova engaged in behavior that was discriminatory. According to published accounts Cordova would grope females on a daily basis in a sexual fashion. Even more troubling is that Cordova would seek sexual relations from the females he was supervising which would put them in a very tough position. This type of sexual harassment is called a quid quo pro, meaning this for that.

Cordova even exposed himself to a female. It is hard to imagine this guy did any real work for the company. This type of behavior is really out of hand and you can see by the settlement amount that the company realized it as well. I mean paying this large amount should tell everyone what was really going on in this place. The employees would constantly complain to management about what was taking place and the company did not care. It wasn't until five women who worked here filed a sexual harassment complaint that something was finally done to stop it.

“This manager’s sexual harassment of his subordinates was blatant and ugly, and it permeated every aspect of life on the job for these women." said John Hendrickson, Chicago EEOC attorney.

Continue reading "Applebee's Settles Sexual Harassment Lawsuit For $1 Million" »

Pine View Living, Inc. is being accused of violating federal law by firing an employee for filing a job discrimination complaint. This is commonly referred to as retaliation. The against Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") filed the complaint on behalf of Rae Anderson. According to published accounts Anderson was fired from her job because she complained to management and ended up filing a discrimination claim based on racial discrimination.

It is always amazing that a company can be so stupid as to fire an employee after they file a formal complaint of discrimination. It is against the law to punish an employee for asserting her rights. My Chicago office is seeing more and more of this type of activity and we are fighting hard to make sure it doesn't continue to happen. I will be following this case to see if the parties are able to settle prior to trial. Over 90% of all lawsuits end up settling prior to trial.

EEOC Chicago Attorney John C. Hendrickson said, “Title VII’s anti-retaliation provision means what it says: Don’t retaliate.”

Huntersville Seafood, Inc. pays $86,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit. The sexual harassment lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") after Peter Economos and other male employees came forward with complaints about being sexually harassed by a male co-worker. It is unusual to have a sexual harassment case involving male-on-male sexual harassment.

The lawsuit details are troubling. According to published accounts the victims were touched on the buttocks, nipples, and testicles and were subjected to almost daily sexual gestures and comments. The employees complainted to management about what was going on and even the owner was made aware--but nothing happened. In fact after Economos complained about the sexual harassment, he was terminated. It is called retaliation when you are fired for complaining about discrimination.

EEOC attorney Lynette A. Barnes said ,“This settlement is a great result for Mr. Economos and the other victims of the harassment.” “This case serves as a reminder to employers that sexual harassment can occur between employees of the same sex and must be addressed if it occurs.”

Allstar Fitness pays $150,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was first filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") after the employee came forward with a complaint. According to documents that are available to the public a custodial worker says she was raped repeatedly by her immediate supervisor, while working at two Allstar Fitness locations. Of course rape is a criminal offense and it is unclear as to whether criminal charges were filed.

The woman claims she was fired by her immediate supervisor when she reported it to management. When you report sexual harassment and are then fired it is called retaliation. The company really made a mistake when it fired the worker shortly after she complained about sexual harassment. In Illinois there is strict liability if a supervisor and person he controls engage in sex. If you look at how much money was given to settle this case, that should tell you how factual the complaint of sexual harassment was.

"They should have known better, as an employer you absolutely have the duty and obligation to protect your workers.", said EEOC attorney May Che

New York University ("NYU") pays $210,000 to settle a national origin discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). The lawsuit alleged that NYU violated federal law by subjecting an African-born employee from Ghana to a hostile work environment that included degrading verbal harassment. When an employee is subjected to hostile comments it not only affects that employee but it can have a negative impact on all employees.

Published accounts reveal that the supervisor of the mailroom regularly addressed the employee with slurs such as “monkey” and “gorilla” and insults such as “go back to your cage” and “do you want a banana?” It is unbelievable that this type of conduct was taking place at an institution of higher learning. It took NYU a very long time to investigate the employee’s many complaints and then took virtually no corrective action. To make matters worse, NYU was even aware that the supervisor made up stories to get the man in trouble and to discipline him. I am glad the man hung in there and made the University pay.

“This suit shows that ugly harassment and retaliation can happen anywhere, even at a prestigious university,” said EEOC Gillian L. Thomas

In Illinois the number of retaliation lawsuits as a result of discrimination claims is on the rise. The employers in this state seem to be punishing employees who report sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination. The employers may feel that in this tough and tight economy they can do as they please--they can't. Plaintiff's attorneys like myself who handle sexual harassment cases and other forms of discrimination fight hard to protect the rights of employees. Make sure you don't let employers push you around and contact a lawyer to learn your rights.

In Chicago, the numbers seem to be getting even worse. My office is getting so many calls from people who are being treated poorly at work. It is very important to document what is happening to you and to make sure you have as many witnesses or emails as possible. Remember human resources will not help you they are there to help the company.

My Chicago office is seeing a rise in the number of sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuits throughout the state. Of course one reason is probably the down economy and the lack of money companies want to spend on employee training. By in the long run the extra money spent on proper training will pay for itself because of the large settlement amounts that can be awarded by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") through the settlement process or by the Illinois Human Rights Commission ("IHRC") or by a jury in a federal court proceeding.

Many times employers believe they can let their human resource department sweep the whole thing under the rug and take care of it. This usually does not take care of the matter and if the employee were smart she would contact an employment attorney for advice. My office handles these claims all the time and remember the company is getting legal advice so you should too.

Analytic Stress Relieving Inc. pays $75,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was first filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”). According to published accountsThe EEOC Analytic Stress terminated a female employee in retaliation for her complaints about sexual harassment. Companies continue to amaze me with how stupid they are when handling a sexual harassment complaint. In this case look at the money this cost them. And they lost a good employee.

Ashley Maygar was fired because she complained that an acting supervisor engaged in offensive and unwanted sexually suggestive behavior in the workplace. An employee is protected by law against being fired if she complains about discriminatory conduct--which includes sexual harassment. In this case, the company fired Maygar because she brought up the sexual harassment. It is important for people to realize their rights and to seek out an employment attorney for advice if they believe they have a problem.

“Unfortunately, we see retaliation as an allegation in a very large segment of the charges filed with EEOC. We intend to protect the rights of employees to complain about illegal behavior,” said EEOC attorney Delner Franklin-Thomas.

In Illinois a hostile work environment exists for all employees if the atmosphere is so negatively charged that the employee cannot perform his or her work properly because another employee has been subjected tot sexual harassment or another form of discrimination. Many times employees get caught up in a sexual harassment investigation and as a result of the investigation, something negative happens to them. For example, after truthfully telling their version of events, the employee is then targeted by a manager or perhaps fired. This would be a form of retaliation and in Illinois it is a form of discrimination.

I suggest that all employees contact an employment law attorney if they are involved in a sexual harassment investigation and believe they are being targeted by human resources or management. Remember you have a short time period from the date of the harassment or discrimination to file a formal complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") or the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR"). My office handles claims at both locations and I offer a free consultation. Make sure you protect your rights.

Mason County Forest Products will pay $900,000 to two female workers to settle a federal lawsuit alleging sexual harassment, gender discrimination and retaliation. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the female workers after settlement efforts failed . According to published reports, the two women were subjected to widespread hostility, and that upper management at the mill chose to ignore the harassment.

In a really troubling admission upper management allegedly said

“Boys will be boys.”

“I stood up for myself and, ultimately, through this process, for other women,” said Debbie Berntsen, one of the two discrimination victims. “Companies like this need to know that they can’t allow women to be treated this way in any workplace.”

Cavalier Telephone Company Inc. pays $1 million to settle an age discrimination lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of two individuals who complained the company was not hiring people because they were over 40 years of age. Age discrimination violates the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 ("ADEA"). Persons age 40 or older are protected from employment discrimination by the act.

According to published accounts for over seven years, Cavalier Telephone’s mid-Atlantic region had a practice of not hiring applicants age 40 or older for sales account executive positions. In a very troubling practice Cavalier offered its employees a $500 bonus for referral of a “friend’s younger brother and sister.”

“Cavalier Telephone’s hiring practices penalized older applicants simply because of their age and that is illegal,” said EEOC General Counsel P. David Lopez. “I am pleased that we were able to work out a resolution of this suit that provides relief for the victims of discrimination and brings the company’s practices into compliance with the law.”

Continue reading "Cavalier Telephone Settles Age Discrimination Lawsuit For $1 Million" »

My Chicago offices gets many questions about what can happen to a witness in a sexual harassment or other discrimination case. The good news is an employee who comes forward and speaks truthfully about what he or she saw is protected from retaliation from the company. If any negative job action were to occur against an employee who comes forward, that employee would have a claim of retaliation against he company. That claim could be filed with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC").

It is very important to speak with an attorney early in the process to determine your rights and to make sure you have the proper protections in place. Don't forget the company has attorneys and human resource personnel to protect their interests. You need to have someone fighting for your rights and interests. If you have a witness to your sexual harassment, I suggest you have the witness contact the same attorney you are utilizing so that the proper protections can be put in place.

Richardson Industries, Inc., doing business as Richco Structures, settled a retaliation lawsuit for $22,500. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of fired employee Morgan Rae Brocker after supervisors allegedly reported to management that another Richco supervisor had engaged in sexual harassment of Brocker at the company’s Christmas party in December 2005.

You can see how long after an incident a settlement can occur in some cases. The long delays are part of the process and one reason why trying to settle a case early is in the best interest of all parties. In this case there was probably more spent on attorney fees than on the settlement amount. I am seeing a rise in retaliation claims in my Chicago office.

“Retaliation complaints have been the fastest-increasing type of complaint filed with the EEOC over the past 10 years,” said John C. Hendrickson, regional attorney of the EEOC’s Chicago District Office

The Bell Company pays $230,000 to settle a gender discrimination and retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Elaine Cusato. According to published accounts the Bell Company subjected Cusato to a hostile work environment while she was employed as a skilled equipment operator. The EEOC said that Cusato was subjected to daily criticism by her supervisor, the plumbing crew foreman, with a vehemence, aggression and profanity that was not directed at male workers which would be the basis for her gender discrimination lawsuit.

When mechanical foreman Timothy Shultz refused to fire Cusato solely because she was considered a “troublemaker” for complaining about the gender discrimination, both were fired as retaliation. This type of activity is not acceptable and will result in a lawsuit every time. I am glad Mr. Shultz stood up and refused to follow the company line. The company should change the way it does business and the way it treats employees.

“Employers have a responsibility to maintain an environment free of gender-based harassment and retaliation, which are clearly and simply illegal,” said EEOC Attorney Debra M. Lawrence.

Corporations are losing their collective minds these days. Not only are claims of sexual harassment and the creation of a hostile work environment on the rise but when the employee reports the sexual harassment to human resources they are being terminated at an alarming rate. This is commonly referred to as retaliation. As mentioned in previous posts, the purpose of human resouces for many companies is to run interference for and eliminate troublemakers. Who does human resources belieave to be the troublemakers ? People who complain about sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination.

I know this sounds counter intuitive but the facts seem to bare this out. It is very important to do several things before going to human resources. First gather and save any evidence of the sexual harssment you may have. This will include emails, text messages, voice messages and any witnesses. Next notify human resources in writing and include copies of your evidence--so you can prove that you complained to human resources and gave them the evidence you had. This will prevent them for denying that you complained about sexual harassment at a later date. Remember in the war that is being waged against employees, human resources isn't your friend.

Genesco, Inc., doing business as Journeys, settled a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit for $20,000. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of three teenage female workers. According to published accounts Genesco subjected 16 year-old Lauren Torres and two other female workers, aged 16 and 19 at the time, to sexual harassment by an assistant manager. When a manager or other person in a position of power engages in sexual harassment there is strict liability to the company.

It is bad enough that the females were subjected to sexual harassment but Torres was retaliated against after complaining about the harassment when her hours were reduced and she was subjected to retaliatory comments by other Genesco managers. This type of behavior by management is not acceptable and I am glad Torres fought for her rights. My Chicago office is seeing an increase in the number of sexual harassment cases.

"Our nation’s youth deserve every opportunity to work without fear of harassment or retaliation.” said EEOC attorney Mary Jo O'Neill

My Chicago offices gets deluged with calls about employees who complain about sexual harassment and report it to human resources. The problem is human resources has its loyalty to the company not the employee. The people at human resources usually try to circle the wagons and keep the employee from filing a formal complaint with either the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") or the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR"). The time limits for filing a sexual harassment complaint with the EEOC is 300 days and 180 for the IDHR. By stalling an investigation or claiming to be handling the situation, those time limits can pass quickly.

So where does this leave the employee when the time limits pass? Well in short you are out of luck. It is very important to contact my office or another attorney to get advice as soon as you are the victim of sexual harassment. The other problem is sometimes an employee will become the victim of retaliation once they file their sexual harassment complaint. Human Resources may be friendly with the harassing person or may be afraid of the persons position or other contacts in the company. Again, don't rely on human resources if you have been the victim of sexual harassment--contact an attorney.

Duquesne University has settled two gender discrimination lawsuits filed by members of its School of Law faculty. Former associate dean Vanessa Browne-Barbour alleged that University officials discriminated against her based on racial discrimination and gender discrimination when they declined to consider her for the interim dean position. The terms of the settlement have not been disclosed, which is common in these types of cases.

The second lawsuit was filed by Former clinical law teacher Alice Stewart. She filed a gender discrimination and retaliation lawsuit against the University. She alleged the current Dean Ken Gormley reduced her pay, demoted her and moved her to an office outside the law school building in retaliation for a sexual harassment claim she filed against him in 2006. Retaliation occurs when a negative job action results after you file a claim of discrimination. You can see how long these cases can last and the best thing to do usually is to try and settle.

"We have resolved their differences and Ms. Stewart is leaving to pursue other interests. The university wishes her well." Statement issued by the University.

In most cases a claim of sexual harassment will be followed by a claim of retaliation because most companies seem to shoot the messenger. A person comes forward with a claim of sexual harassment and human resources usually either doesn't take the claim seriously or then looks into how they can dig up dirt and discipline the person being harassed. It is very important to contact human resources by email so that you have a paper trail of what took place and you can prove you complained.

Remember that you only have 180 days from the last date of sexual harassment to file a claim with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") or 300 days with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). If you file with the IDHR they will automatically file with the EEOC. Sometimes a company will drag out its' investigation past the 180 and 300 day time limits in order to prevent the employee from asserting their rights. Make sure you don't allow this to happen.

Sonic Drive-In of Los Lunas, Ltd. and B&B Consultants settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit for $2 Million. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a class of women, some of whom were teenagers. According to published accounts, former manager Robert Gomez, subjected a class of women, including teenagers, to sexual harassment, including sexual comments and innuendo as well as unwanted touching. This type of behavior should not happen to such a large group of employees without the knowledge of management.

Allegations included that women who asked Gomez to stop harassing them or complained about their work environment were subjected to retaliation by management. Some employees were also forced to quit their jobs because of the sexual harassment, retaliation, and/or the employer’s failure to provide preventive or remedial relief. When this occurs it is called a constructive discharge. You can see how much money this type of behavior and activity cost the company. I can't believe that companies don't spend more time and money training management. I hope other companies can learn a lesson from this.

“Managers must constantly be reminded of their obligation to maintain workplaces where employees are not subjected to illegal harassment or retaliation,” said EEOC attorney Mary Jo O'Neill.

Ricoh Americas Corporation ("Ricoh") will pay $125,000 to settle a retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of three employees. The three employees were James Nyema-Davies, Anibal Melendez and Gustavo Tovar. According to published accounts Ricoh subjected the three to discrimination based on their race and national origin which was black and Columbian and Puerto Rican. The lawsuit further alleged that Ricoh suspended and then fired all three employees for complaining about the harassment-which is retaliation.

The men were subjected to offensive national origin- and race-based harassment, including derogatory comments by the site manager in their location. On a daily or near-daily basis, the site manager made comments to the three employees such as stating that she “hated Puerto Ricans,” that “Hispanics are so stupid,” “Colombians are good for nothing except drugs,” and that “damn, f-----g Africans . . .ain’t worth s--t.”

“Race and national origin harassment include racial or ethnic slurs or other expressions of dislike for different racial and ethnic backgrounds,” said EEOC Attorney Lynette A. Barnes

Continue reading "Ricoh Americas Corp. Pays $125,000 To Settle Retaliation Lawsuit" »

A roofing company, Herzog roofing will pay $71,500 to seven black, Hispanic and American Indian employees to settle racial discrimination and retaliation lawsuit. The retaliation lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the workers. According to published accounts, employees were frequently subjected to racial epithets, racial jokes and hostile treatment by other employees at Herzog Roofing.

The discrimination was largely the acts of supervisors. The employees complained but the complaints fell on deaf ears. When this type of activity takes place and is not stopped by management liability attaches. In this case the company ended up paying a pretty good amount of money. In the future I am sure the company will handle things in a different manner.

“Herzog now understands that it is not enough for an employer to have an anti-discrimination policy. The employer must enforce the policy and take preventive and corrective action to effectively fulfill its statutory obligation to maintain a workplace free of discrimination, including harassment.” said EEOC attorney Julie Schmid

True North Inc. which operates a shelter for women who have been victims of domestic violence and sexual abuse pays $103,000 to settle a retaliation lawsuit. The retaliation lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of two employees who were punished by True North, Inc. for reporting sexual harassment by the shelter’s executive director. The two women, Gause and Lawson claim Executive Director Leigh Voltmer touched staff members inappropriately on several occasions.

Less than two weeks after making the complaint, Gause was terminated and Lawson was demoted and her salary was cut. Both women had received positive feedback regarding their performance during their tenure as employees, but were terminated without warning, allegedly for poor performance. Following the board’s actions, other employees came forward and complained about a hostile work environment created by Voltmer.

“Nancy Gause and Tracie Lawson came forward at great personal risk to report complaints they had received from the shelter’s staff. Comprehensive Human Services is an organization that purports to shield women from abuse. These women should have been supported in reporting sexual harassment, not punished for doing the right thing." said EEOC attorney Barbara Seely.

There is a myth out there that most sexual harassment cases go to trial and there is a large verdict. One reason for this myth is the fact that most big cases get publicity and are reported in the various medias. Cases that settle for millions often make the news and give people a false sense of the true value of most sexual harassment cases. The average case does not settle for big money but settling the case is often good for a number of reasons. First, it gives closure to the victim and helps the person get on with her life. Second, it gives a guarantee of some money and lasty it can be taken as a victory-the fact that the other side paid some money. Most sexual harassment cases also involve retaliation and the creation of a hostile work environment.

The danger in taking a sexual harassment or other type of case to trial is that by the time the case goes to trial, the company could be out of business or bankrupt. The reason it takes so long is that if you file with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") they cross file with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). The IDHR has up to one-year to complete its' investigation and that only gives you the right to file directly with the Illinois Human Rights Commission ("IHRC") if the IDHR finds substanial evidence. It will take another year with the IHRC before the actual trial and a decision by the judge after trial can take another two-years. If the EEOC investigates instead of the IDHR, it can take even longer. So if you can setttle.

Longs Drugs a/k/a CVS Caremark pays $55,000 to settle a gender discrimination, retaliation and racial discrimination lawsuit. The multi-count lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Marcia Guaman an African-American female buyer. According to details which have become public, Guaman was treated different from colleagues who were not black or female. As an example given in the lawsuit Guaman received verbal and written warnings for her performance numbers, while white female co-workers with lower scores did not face any disciplinary action.

Additional odd behavior by the company included Guaman’s requests for vacation days being denied, even though she asked prior to white co-workers who were granted vacation for the same dates. Guaman was discharged from her position a few months after she raised the differential treatment to human resources which is the basis of the retaliation charge. Many times it isn't a company policy to discriminate but rather the actions of a manager. This underscores how important it is to properly train employees and members of management.

“Employers should guard against bias creeping in to distort company policies, and training staff is an important preventive measure,” said EEOC Attorney William R. Tamayo.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") released its' figures for 2010 and the number of retaliation claims is on the rise. It should be no suprise that employers have been treating employees in such a horrible fashion. The economy is down and it is a cut-throat atmosphere out there. According to the EEOC retaliaion claims accounted for 36% of all discrimination charges filed--99,922 total charges were filed. What this shows is that employees are complaining about discriminatory behavior in the workplace and they are being singled out and treated unfairly for complaining.

My Chicago office is not only seeing an increase in retaliation claims but also an increase in sexual harassment claims. Many times they go hand-in-hand. The employee will complain about sexual harassment and then a negative job action will take place against the employee who complained. The United States Supreme Court expanded retaliation claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include third parties. In Thompson v. North American Stainless LLP, the court held that the boyfriend of a female can claim retaliation if he is targeted because his girlfriend files a claim of sexual harassment.

Monterey Gourmet Foods, Inc., pays $535,000 to four Latino workers to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit. The sexual harassment lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the employees. According to details which became public, three women and one man employed as packers in the lasagna, tamale and ravioli production units suffered sexual harassment by the same male supervisor. The sexual harassment included sexual comments, texting obscene pictures, and unwanted physical touching.

Here is the part that really got the company in trouble. The employees reported the sexual harassment to management and the human resources department but nothing happened. And to make matters worse just weeks after two workers filed discrimination charges with the EEOC, all four workers were discharged or laid off in retaliation. I bet after paying out this kind of money the company will not act like this in the future. I see this all the time in my Chicago office where human resources shoots the messenger.

“You should not have to choose between your personal dignity and making a living,” said the male worker, who is in his 80s. “It is good to know that the law protects workers from that kind of treatment, no matter whether you are male or female, young or old."

Chrysler Group, LLC pays $60,000 to settle a retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to published accounts Chrysler’s second-shift supervisor at the Milwaukee facility removed one of the women from the coveted position of driving a power sweeper and assigned her to gather parts in the back order release area. A male with less seniority was placed in the position which would go against normal policy. The female questioned why this was taking place as it seemed to be a form of gender discrimination. The manager called the female a troublemaker and threatened to fire her--which is retaliation.

Retaliation for opposing gender discrimination violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The female worker stuck up for her rights and would not let the company push her around. You can tell by the settlement amount that the company realized it made a mistake and wanted to put this matter behind it. This type of activity also creates a hostile work environment for all workers and can hinder production. Hopefully better processes and training will be in place for the future and employees can have a discrimination free work place.

said EEOC attorney John Hendrickson “Any adverse job action that might deter an employee from pursuing his or her rights is unlawful. Title VII protects employees who oppose discrimination even when their complaints do not take the form of an EEOC charge or written grievance."

Diane Trujillo agreed to accept $28,000 to settle her sexual harassment lawsuit against former school principal David Castillo. Trujillo also alleged Tucumcari Public Schools engaged in retaliation for filing the sexual harassment complaint. Published accounts claim Trujillo was sexually harassed by the principal and turned him in. However, human resources told her to just go along with it and not rock the boat. This seems to be a typical response from human resources these days.

Under terms of the settlement Trujillo will remain in her position as a reading specialist and student assistance team chairwoman for the remainder of the school year and remain with the school in the future. I am happy to see Trujillo hang tough and not allow the school district or the principal bully her and force her to shut up. The settlement should send a signal to others that they can come forward if they are the victim of sexual harassment.

Alanna Taylor Berthelot who is a former employee of ERA Helicopters alleged she was fired after reporting that male co-workers subjected her to sexual harsasment and a hostile work environment. The allegations include sexually suggestive comments and inappropriate touching. Just as an aside, there is no appropriate touching in the workplace. As if that weren't bad enough Berthelot reported the behavior to human resources but was told to "suck it up and move on." And then the company fired her which is considered retaliation.

As is typical in most cases like this Berthelot is seeking damages for emotional distress, front pay, back pay, loss of benefits, attorney's fees and court costs. This type of activity at work is troubling if proven and shows what human resources is all about for most companies--a department that cares about the company not the employee.

In good news for former police officer Patrick Shaltry, his three-year-old wrongful termination lawsuit may get settled this week for $700,000. A court earlier awarded Shaltry $750,000 for his retaliation claim after rejecting his sexual harassment claim. The city is not going to appeal this award in exchange for Shaltry lowering his award by $50,000 and settling the case for $700,000. The main issue was Shaltry claims he was sexually harassed by his female supervisor and then fired for not going along with it which would be retaliation. There was real merit to this claim because this kind of money is not given for frivolous cases.

Shaltry was fired for alleging Sgt. Anjanette “A.J.” Tuer who was the head of internal affairs for the Saginaw Police Department sexually harassed him. Shaltry turned in this conduct and was fired, however the city claims Shaltry was fired because of five complaints made against him by four citizens and one fellow officer. The settlement amount should give you a good indication of whose version of events is more accurate.

The Steakhouse at Desert Canyon and Desert Canyon Golf Club is being sued by ex-manager White for retaliation after complaining about the head chef. The complaint was first filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to published accounts several female employees felt they had been sexually harassed by the head chef. White who was the manager was then fired by upper management after he brought the sexual harassment complaint to their attention.

Golf International offered to rehire him but conditioned this offer upon his withdrawal of the EEOC charge. But White would not budge to their demands and instead went forward with his EEOC complaint. White insisted on pursuing the EEOC charge, and Golf International refused to rehire him. In a really wacky move Golf International later rehired White, but terminated him again several weeks later.

“It is particularly important for the EEOC to vigorously enforce the anti-retaliation provisions in our employment discrimination laws,” said EEOC attorney Mary Jo O’Neill

Fisher Sand and Gravel Company pays $150,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to published accounts, Fisher Sand & Gravel Co. subjected two women workers to egregious verbal sexual harassment by a supervisor and then fired one of them after she repeatedly asked the supervisor to stop harassing her and complained to a job superintendent. When an employee is terminated because of complaining of sexual harassment it is referred to as retaliation.

"Women who work in traditionally male-dominated professions or workplaces can be particularly susceptible to sexual harassment,” said EEOC Attorney Mary Jo O’Neill

Well the results are in. The number of sexual harassment lawsuits filed by my office in 2011 has increased over 2010. Other attorneys I talk with are seeing an increase as well. Of course if you file a complaint of sexual harassment in Illinois, you can file with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") and that agency will cross-file with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). I find that the IDHR does a good job of investigating the claim of sexual harassment and also of helping with settlement talks.

Along with claims of sexual harassment I also see a number of retaliation claims. What happens is an employee complains to management about sexual harassment and is then fired or had another type of negative job action take against him. Usually this type of action is very transparent. The employee is a good worker, complains and is then fired. It looks so obvious. My Chicago office is seeing a real increase in the number of retaliation claims.

Hyundai Ideal Electric Company ("HIEC") coughs up $188,000 to settle a gender discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a female drafter, Tabitha Wagner. According to accounts which have been made public, Wagner was an experienced drafter and was hired for a job preparing drawings and sketches for batteries and engines. The problem was she was being paid a lower salary than that of a similarly situated male who was hired only months later. Wagner did what most would consider the right thing. She brought the disparity to the attention of the human resources manager, and was subsequently fired as retaliation for complaining.

This type of activity is so tranparent and isn't fooling anyone. It amazes me that companies still behavior like this. Why didn't they just bring her pay in line with her male counterpart? I am glad she stuck up for herself and filed a complaint with the EEOC. In Illinois you can also file with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") and that organization will cross file with the EEOC.

“The EEOC will not tolerate discriminatory pay practices,” said Debra Lawrence, EEOC attorney.

Fisher Nut Company pays $150,000 to seven Latina employees to settle a retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the workers after the EEOC tried to settle the case. Workers were given crazy warnings about things that normal employees are not subjected to. For exampline in one instance a worker was warned for laughing during the course of the work day. All but one of the workers were moved from various other jobs to the entry-level almond-sorting position, widely considered the least desirable work at the plant.

According to published accounts the Latina employees faced verbal threats and irrational warnings from their immediate supervisors when all of them complainted of discrimination. Ultimately, all the women were fired within two months of the informal meeting. This type of conduct is not acceptable and I am glad the EEOC made the company pay.

“Because these workers were vulnerable to retaliation that might be disguised by the seasonal nature of their jobs, it was a priority to pursue this case,” said EEOC Attorney William R. Tamayo.

Western Washington University pays $135,000 to Shannon O'Dwyer to settle a racial discrimination and retaliation lawsuit. O'Dwyer was a dispatcher in its police department who alleged she was fired after complaining about co-workers making racist and sexist remarks. Fired for complaining about discrimination is known as retaliation. This type of behavior is uncalled for and will cost a University money every time it happens. I am glad Shannon stuck in there and did not put up with it.

The hostile work environment type remarks included men saying that Western was only hiring minorities to fill quotas, claiming a woman only kept her job because she performed sexual favors, and that an African-American co-worker was only promoted because he's black. Western Washington University would do well to train its' employees to act better and to understand how comments like these can affect other employees.

According to the University O'Dwyer was fired during her probationary period and that it did not violate state law. However, I think the settlement amount speaks to what really took place. That is a great deal of money for a justifiable firing. I am seeing an increase in the number of University related claims of discrimination and retaliation. My Chicago office is especially busy with these types of claims.

Chubb & Son is paying $110,000 to settle a retaliation and racial discrimination lawsuit that was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Kong Chee Vang. According to published accounts by the EEOC, Vang was a Hmong tribsman and employee of Chubb and was refused a promotion because of her Asian race--which is racial discrimination.

Additionally Chubb failed to stop its managers from using stereotypes and negative assumptions based on race while considering Vang for a promotion to underwriter. The company then engaged in retaliation after she filed a complaint with the EEOC by not promoting her on a second attempt. This type of behavior will not be tolerated and will result in cash settlements every time. I am glad Vang did not take this sitting down and instead went to the EEOC and filed a lawsuit.

"Managers who may think they are ‘just standing up’ for their companies when they retaliate against complainants are, in fact, just doing more damage.” said EEOC John Hendrickson

Eclipse Advantage, Inc. pays $60,000 to settle a racial discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Rodney Williams. According to published accounts, African-American employee Williams endured racial discrimination and when he reported it, the company engaged in retaliation. Williams began working in a supervisory position with the company and shortly thereafter was subjected to racial epithets from his superiors.

In a remarkable event, on his first day, Williams was asked if he was a “black man or a n----r.” The lawsuit alleged management frequently used racial slurs, most notably the N-word in the workplace. And Williams was demoted from supervisor to team lead and then discharged from his position as a team lead after complaining about a hostile work environment. This type of behavior is unacceptable and as you can see it will cost the company money and bad publicity every time.

“ The settlement not only provides monetary compensation for the discrimination victim, it also provides significant injunctive relief to prevent and eliminate further harassment and retaliation.” said EEOC Attorney Debra Lawrence

Delta Family Health and Fitness for Children pays $87,500 to settle a lawsuit for retaliation. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") after Delta fired four employees. The four employees were an employee who complained about sexual harassment, an identified witness to the discrimination, and two other employees who had filed charges with the EEOC. It is hard to believe all four employees suddenly became bad employees and warrented being terminated.

Usually companies are a little more subtle but in this case an employee complained about sexual harassment and named a co-worker as a witness to the harassment. Both employees were terminated on three days later. That is a pretty short period of time to fire two employee given what they are complaining about and witnessing. Two other employees filed charges of discrimination with the EEOC and they were fired. I am glad the EEOC was able to get to the bottom of things and hold the company responsible.

“This case demonstrates the EEOC’s commitment to aggressively pursue remedies for retaliation victims.” said EEOC Attorney Faye A. Williams

StoneRidge Health and Rehab Center, LLC, pays $22,000 to settle a retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a female supervisor. According to published accounts the supervisor filed a complaint of racial discrimination with the company and was fired days later. When a good employee is fired within a short period of time after complaining about discrimination there is always a retaliation charge to follow.

In this case such a short period of time lapsed that it gives the impression that she was only fired because she complained to the company about a racial issue. It is very important to document was is going on at work and to file a complaint internally if you believe you are the victim of discrimination. I am glad the EEOC got involved and this woman would not let the company push her around.

“The number of retaliation lawsuits has risen across the country and within the Memphis District,” said EEOC Attorney Faye A. Williams “People have a right to complain about discrimination in the workplace, and the EEOC is committed to aggressively combating retaliation for it.”

Prestige Home Centers, Inc. pays $79,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of several man. According to published accounts male employees were subjected to sexual harassment from a male supervisor. The sexual harassment included touching, requests for sexual favors and sexual comments.

When the men complained about the sexual harassment the supervisor retaliated. This type of behavior also creates a hostile work environment for all the workers and could lead to additional complaints. In this case, the men would not take the abuse from the supervisor any longer and filed directly with the EEOC. I am glad to see the case resolved in a favorable manner.

“Employees should not be subjected to this type of harassing behavior in the modern workplace,” “Employers must act swiftly to correct hostile work environments and prevent employee exposure to such outrageous conduct and retaliation.”said EEOC Attorney Robert Weisberg.

Willamette Tree Wholesalers must pay $150,000 to four Latino farm workers to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the four workers. There were further allegations of retaliation because one of the workers was fired along with her husband. In a very rare case, the Judge said that the four were subjected to sexual harassment so extreme that the judge agreed to extend a 300-day statute of limitations to allow the complaint to go forward. Normally, you have 300 days from the date of sexual harassment to file a complaint with the EEOC.

There are other shocking details including allegations that one of the sisters was taken to remote areas of the farm by a supervisor, who allegedly threatened her with pruning shears, termination and bodily harm and then sexually assaulted her repeatedly over a period of several months. The woman would not give in to the sexual demands and was fired. Here is a great article on 20 Ways to lesson your chances of sexual assult.

Tameika Dorman filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against the television entity known as Black Entertainment Television ("BET"). According to published reports about the sexual harassment lawsuit Dorman was editing a video session with a BET employee named Derek Clarke. The two were putting together a previously taped segment that Ms. Dorman was hosting and producing. Instead of focusing on the task at hand, Clarke began to repeatedly re-play video footage of her butt while she was dressed in a short skirt and walking up a set of stairs. Dorman claims this was a form of sexual harassment and the basis of her lawsuit.

Dorman asked him why he kept playing the segment of her butt and asked him to stop but he did not. Instead he grabbed his crotch, moaned and said he loved her butt. Dorman complained to management and asked that she not have to work with him in the future. What ended up happening was Dorman got removed from producing a major projected called BET Hip-Hop Honors and was eventually fired. Being fired within such a short period of time of reporting sexual harassment is referred to as retaliation. I am sure this is going to cost BET some money and I will keep readers posted of the outcome.

"Clarke grabbed and repeatedly rubbed his crotch, began to moan and said it was because he loved her butt, that she was sexy and that she did not know what he was going to do to her."

Kimberley Picchiarini-Pallo has been paid $75,000 by Westmoreland County to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit she filed against the county prison and its officials. The sexual harassment lawsuit alleged that Pallo was threatened with termination of her job if she did not have sex with her supervisors. In the lawsuit she named the Warden John Walton, Deputy Warden Steve Cmar and Lt. John Hostoffer. It is not unusual to name multiple people in a sexual harassment lawsuit.

Pallo claims the jail is nothing more than a place where male officers solicited sex from female officers. Pallo claims that the top officials at the jail knew what was going on and refuse to stop it. The county responded by saying Pallo was insubordinate and unprofessional in her duties as a corrections officer. Of course the $75,000 settlement amount should tell you which side of the story was more accurate. Pallo is no longer working for the county and the reason is because of the sexual harassment complaints so she could claim retaliation if they fired her or constructive discharge if she couldn't take the sexual harassment any longer and quit.

Sexual harassment seems to be a growing problem for employees. It ends up being a double whamy. First, they are exposed to the sexual harassment and then usually to retaliation for reporting the sexual harassment. Unfortunately, many companies don't seem to spend the time properly training their human resource staff on how best to handle a sexual harassment complaint. I see many employees in my office who have been the victim of conduct that rises to the level of sexual harassment and then they report the conduct to human resources, only to be terminated. There seems to be a sense that if you rock the boat in a company, you get thrown off.

It is very important for employees to seek the advice of an experienced sexual harassment and employment law attorney once they first encounter a problem. The employee must realize that human resources is concerned with the best interest of the company and not necessarily the best interest of the employee. There are strict time limits in place for filing a complaint of discrimination with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). For sexual harassment the complaint must be filed with the IDHR within 180 days and for the EEOC 300 days. Don't let the companies human resource department drag out an investigation and make you miss those filing dates.

Carole Pannozzo filed a sexual harassment complaint against her boss Robert Henry alleging that Henry made sexual comments to her and tried to have a sexual relationship with her. Pannozzo also alleged that when she complained, Henry engaged in retaliation by giving her a bad performance review. That case has now been settled and Pannozzo will received $30,000. Pannozzo held the title of executive director of human resources

The sexual harassment complaint was filed with the state Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities which is similar to the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR"). This case shows that if you are willing to stand up for your rights and not get pushed around, you can get compensation. Even though the employer is claiming there was no wrongdoing, the settlement amount speaks for itself.

City Attorney Mark T. Anastasi said the settlement was reached to avoid costly litigation and what he called the "vagaries of a jury trial."

It seems like the workers who need the most protection are facing the most difficult working conditions. A recent case involving a vegetable packer illustrates the point. What makes this case even worse is the fact that the female who was the victim of sexual harassment was a teenager. Adam Brothers Farming, Inc. agreed to pay $27,500 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the teenage worker.

According to published accounts a male supervisor began sexually harassing the teen by asking the teenager to perform oral sex, touching her body, brushing his body against her backside, and making lewd gestures. The teenager reported the conduct that was taking place and the sexual harassment to a foreman in an attempt to have it stopped. But in an amazing series of events she was transferred and disciplined, then fired within two weeks of her complaint. This forms the basis of her retaliation claim. It is really shocking that the company acted this way.

“Our nation’s youngest workers can be particularly vulnerable to sexual harassment, particularly in the agricultural industry.” said EEOC attorney Anna Park

Continue reading "Adam Brothers Farms Pays $27,500 To Settle Sexual Harassment Lawsuit" »

Family owned trucking company Howard Sheppard, Inc. pays $32,500 to settle a retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Sarah Waller. The lawsuit alleged Sheppard fired truck driver Waller in retaliation for making a complaint about sexual harassment. If an employee complains about discriminatory conduct and then has a negative job action taken against him or her, it is considered retaliation. In this case the complaint of sexual harassment was the discriminatory conduct and therefore being fired was retaliation.

Sheppard denied any liability or wrongdoing in the lawsuit however, they are paying $32,500 to settle the case. It still amazes me how many companies fire employees who complain about discrimination in the workplace. How hard would it have been to just investigate the sexual harassment complaint and take the appropriate action? Hopefully Sheppard learned a lesson and will do things different in the future.

“By coming forward with her discrimination charge, Ms. Waller’s efforts will go a long way towards preventing future mistreatment of female truck drivers.” said EEOC attorney Robert Dawkins

The United States Supreme Court recently expanded protections for employees who complain about violations in the workplace. In Thompson v. North American Stainless
the Court held that an employee who was fired because of the actions of a spouse or fiance could file a retaliation claim. In fact he Court said any third party can file a retaliation claim if the third party is being punished because of a claim of discrimination another employee is filing. In this case Eric Thompson was fired because his fiancee Miriam Regalado fired a gender discrimination complaint against North American Stainless where they both worked.

A very short time after Regalado filed her gender discrimination claim Thompson was fired. The Court did not buy the company position that if it allowed Thompson to succeed on his claim it would open the floodgate of complaints against employers. This is a very important case because it allows other employees to file claims of retaliation if a negative job action is taken against them for supporting another employees claim of discrimination.

The Court said "it was obvious that a reasonable worker might be dissuaded from engaging in protected activity if she knew that her fiance would be fired."

Jackson Public Schools settled a federal lawsuit that was based on allegations that former security chief John Coleman creating a hostile work environment. The person making the claim was Debra Robinson who was the former office manager for Coleman's department.
Robinson initially accused Coleman of creating a hostile work environment based on sexual comments even though he was not engaged in sexual harassment with her. Robinson also accused him of gender discrimination and retaliation, but those claims were dismissed for lack of evidence.

In cases like this, the hostile work environment is created because of some other discriminatory conduct. In this case the conduct was sexual comments directed at other female workers. The amount of the settlement is confidential at this time but because it involves a public entity I am sure it will be released in the future. I am glad that Robinson stuck to her guns and did not let the school disctrict get away with the discrimination that took place.

Arkansas Baptist College ("ABC") pays $20,000 to settle a retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Mary Jarrett. According to details which have become public, Jarrett was retaliated against because she previously filed a discrimination claim against the college and the college canceled her contract based on the former complaint. Her previous discrimination complaint involved age discrimination and gender discrimination among others.

My chicago office is seeing an increase in the number of college and university related claims of discrimination. I don't know if it is the arrogance of college administrators or the fact that the job market is so tight right now that people think they can engage in discrimination against workers. I am glad to see Mary Jarrett stick to her guns and not let the college push her around. There are protections available to people who file discrimination charges and hopefully the college learned a lesson on how to treat employees.

“It is plainly illegal to fire an employee for engaging in her statutorily protected right of filing a charge with the EEOC, and we are pleased that the parties were able to resolve this matter.” said EEOC attorney Faye A. Williams

Continue reading "College Settles Retaliation Lawsuit For $20,000" »

Kerrry Woods is a happy man today because a jury awarded him $451,000 for his sexual harassment lawsuit against Boh Bros. Construction Co. The iron worker first filed his complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to documents and statements produced during the lawsuit the superintendent flashed him and routinely taunted him about seeming feminine. Most of the time sexual harassment lawsuits involve male-female or female-male harassment, but in this instance the sexual harassment was male-on-male.

Woods first filed an internal sexual harassment and hostile work environment complaint with the company. The company did not take the complaint seriously and after receiving his complaint, the company engaged in retaliation according to Woods. He claims the company transferred him to its another facility where he earned less and had a longer commute. The company laid him off a short time later. As is typical in these types of cases the company said they laid Woods off for business reasons--but the jury wasn't buying it.

Woods said "I knew it wasn't right that the company should be able to treat people this way," "No one should have to put up with that kind of abuse day after day."

South Basin Packing will pay $80,000 to settle an Americans With Disabiliy Act ("ADA") discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to published accounts South Basin fired a worker immediately after he informed the company of his recent diagnosis for a chronic medical condition. This is a violation of the ADA because employers by law are required to make reasonable accommodations for an employee disability.

In Illinois my office is seeing an increase in the number of ADA claims filed by employees. Of course I am seeing an increase in all types of employment discrimination lawsuits. It seems that employers are forgetting about how to properly treat employees and they are disregarding the law. There could also be a claim for retaliation if the employee is terminated for complaining about an ADA related issue.

EEOC atorney William R. Tamayo said, “This settlement should emphasize to employers that hiring and firing decisions must be based on facts -- whether or not an applicant or employee has the ability to do the job -- and not fears concerning disability.”

International Profit Associates pays $8 million to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit that involves 82 female employees. The lawsuit was filed against the Buffalo Grove Illinois company by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the women. You can see how long these cases can take as this case was filed 10 years ago.

The main allegations against the company were that women were regularly propositioned for sex, offered job benefits contingent on the performance of sexual acts and offered money for sex. In some cases women were given negative job performances if they did not go along with the requests for sex which is retaliation. More than 40 women reported being sexually assaulted consisting of everything from attempted rape to slapping

“This is, by far, the most egregious sexual harassment that our Chicago office has ever seen,” said EEOC attorney Diane Smason

Rawland Leon Sorensen, the owner and manager of more than 50 residential rental properties in Bakersfield is being sued for sexual harassment in violation of the Fair Housing Act. In Illinois a landlord could also be sued for sexual harassment under the Illinois Human Rights Act and specifically under the public accomodation provision. The claim would be filed with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR").

According to published reports the victim alleges Sorensen sexually harassed female tenants by making unwelcome sexual comments. Some of the details include Sorensen exposing his genitals to female tenants. Sorensen would allegedly take adverse actions against women who refused his sexual advances. So another words he would engage in retaliation if a women did not obey him.

“No person should have to fear sexual harassment from a landlord who holds a key to their home.” said attorney Thomas E. Perez

Country Inn pays $85,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Candace Bland and other female employees. According to published accounts Bland who worked as a housekeeper, and other female staff members employed in the kitchen were subjected to sexual harassment by male employees. A very troubling piece of evidence was that two of the females that were sexually harassed were 18-year-old high school students.

Details of the sexual harassment included male employees requesting the women go out on dates and the use of sexually explicit language. Additionally the males engaged in offensive and unwelcome touching and groping of the female employees. In the most bizarre allegation, a female claims the male exposed himself to her while she was working. Bland complained to the owner and management, but the employer failed to stop the sexual harassment and instead unlawfully reduced the working hours of women who had complained to punish them. This is referred to as retaliation and is the basis for the second charge.

“Sexual harassment of employees in the hospitality industry continues to be a serious problem,” said EEOC attorney Spencer H. Lewis, Jr.

DiMare Ruskin, Inc. had a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") claiming the company subjected an entire class of females to sexual harassment and then retaliation, when they complained about it. According to published accounts, father-and-son supervisors at the DiMare tomato facility subjected female employees to severe sexual harassment. Any sexual harassment is horrible but some instances are more aggregious than others and in this case the alleged sexual harassment was on the high end of the scale.

The sexual harassment included physical contact such as groping and forcibly attempting to kiss the female employees. It seems as though the father-and-son team thought they could do anything to these females and no one could hold them responsible. There was also verbal harassment, which included the usual vulgar sexual comments. When the females decided to complain the father-and-son supervisors engaged in retaliation. Retaliation takes place when a negative job action results from a complaint of discriminatory conduct.

“It is crucial that the EEOC continue its efforts to eradicate sexual harassment and all other types of discrimination from the workplace whether it occurs in an office, a factory, at a construction site or in agricultural fields.” said EEOC attorney Robert Weisberg

Continue reading "DiMare Ruskin Farms Subjecting Women To Sexual Harassment" »

The Wild Beaver Saloon is being sued for pregnancy discrimination because it unlawfully fired a female bartender/server because of her pregnancy. The lawsuit was first filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") after settlement talks broke down. Employers have to be mindful that once an employee gets pregnant, she just can't be fired for that reason. I am glad this female did not just go along with the program and instead filed a complaint with the EEOC.

In a case like this it is not uncommon to seek compensatory and punitive damages as well as a permanent injunction to prevent the company from engaging in any employment practice that discriminates against any employee. Over 90% of cases end up settling prior to trial so there is a good chance this case will settle as well. Many times along with filing a complaint of pregnancy discrimination there will be corresponding complaints of gender discrimination and retaliation.

“Employees who become pregnant should not lose their jobs because of their condition,” said EEOC attorney Laurie A. Young

There is good news for those who are victims of sexual harassment and their bosses is doing some of the harassing via the cell phone. Even deleted text messages can be retrieved and used in court. Text messages provide solid evidence and make it hard to deny what is being said. Americans sent 173 billion texts monthly last year, up from 7 billion a month in 2005, according to CTIA-The Wireless Association. It is now common for all levels of employees in corporations to utilize text messaging as a legitimate form of communications.

If you are receiving text messages which you believe are sexual in nature or an attempt to start an inappropriate relationship, you should save them and print them out. You should also contact an employment attorney so you can maximize the affectiveness of the messages and plan a strategy. Many times employees who come forward with claims of sexual harassment end up getting terminated or are otherwise the victims of retaliation.

Chiropractor Paul Basile had a sexual harassment lawsuit filed against him by two former employees. According to the lawsuit Chrisine Gensey and Rosangela Doyle claim he groped them, made sexually suggestive comments and retaliated after they complained. Basile made remarks about Doyle's figure and placed his crotch against her hand when he was giving her a chiropractic adjustment.

According to published accounts both women complained about the sexual harassment but since he was the boss and owner the complaints fell on deaf ears. The lawsuit also has a count for retaliation but from the documents it is unclear what the retaliation is. The complaint does say the sexual harassment created a hostile work environment and the women's careers were negatively impacted and they both ended up losing money.

The lawsuit alleges Basile asked Doyle "where her remote control for her underwear was."

Sandra Smith filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against the University of Cincinnati ("UC"). Smith was fired last year and was the former Executive Director to The President. Smith is not just suing he University, she is also suing two of its top officials alleging sexual harassment, retaliation and a hostile work environment. According to published accounts, Smith claims UC Executive Vice President Fred Reynolds hugged and kissed her, and made unwanted advances toward her in the office.

Smith first filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") which is required prior to filing a sexual harassment lawsuit in federal court. Smith says Reynolds tried to make her look crazy and blamed her allegations of sexual harassment on a "distorted mind" from medication after back surgery. Smith alleges she complained to UC President Greg Williams about the sexual harassment and creation of a hostile work environment but he did not take her allegations seriously. What he did do is give her a negative performance review and fired her.

The University issued a statement which said " We will defend ourselves vigorously in court."

A fast food restaurant has been charged with sexual harassment and retaliation. According to published accounts, Gala AZ Holdings, Inc. subjected a female employee to sexual harassment and retaliation according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). Andriana Lopez was employed by the restaurant and allegedly she was sexually harassed by an assistant manager. The sexual harassment consisted of the assistant manager fondling himself in her presence, grabbing her buttocks, and attempting to grab her breasts.

Lopez complained to her managers but not only was nothing done to stop the sexual harassment but remarkabely she was suspended and then fired in retaliation for her complaint. This type of behavior seems to be increasing and some employers just don't seem to understand how important it is to properly address a sexual harassment complaint. In this instance, the woman was subjected to a hostile work environment and the company just made things worse.

“Employers who subject people to harassment based on sex are violating federal law,” said EEOC attorney Mary Jo O’Neill, "We have seen an alarming increase in retaliation charges, and we are very concerned that employees know that they can report discrimination without repercussions.”

Brand Energy & Infrastructure Services, Inc. ("Brand") pays $110,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit which was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of former employee, Jauronice Hayes. According to published accounts Hayes worked for Brand at its Conoco Phillips facility and was sexually harassed by her male supervisor. Some of the sexual harassment included inappropriate sexual statements, requests and demands for sexual favors, and sexual touching.

And probably the most revealing testimony was that the supervisor exposed his genitals to Hayes and informed Hayes that if she did not have sex with him, she would be laid off. Threats for sex are not only illegal but forms of sexual harassment and retaliation. In this case Hayes anonymously complained about the sexual harassment to a company hotline and also repeatedly opposed the sexual harassment and rejected her supervisor’s sexual advances.

“I just wanted to do my job and be left alone,” said Hayes. “My boss touching my body and trying to pressure me to have sex with him really hurt me. No woman should have to choose between putting up with this kind of abuse or losing her job and not being able to support her family."

Continue reading "Brand Energy Pays $110,000 To Settle Sexual Harassment and Retaliation Lawsuit" »

Mid-American Specialties must pay $1.5 million after a jury found they violated federal law in the sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to published accounts Mid- American had two managers who subjected three female employees to severe sexual harassment. The sexual harassment consisted of forcing one woman to place her hands on his penis area. Another example was senior managers would make the females become part of what they called the smooching club in order to receive sales leads.

The females rejected these advances and as a result two females were fired which constitutes retaliation. To make matters worse Mid-American had no sexual harassment policy, no training on sexual harassment, and no reporting procedures in place during this time. In what might have been the most remarkable testimony at trial, senior people from the company testified that they did not think that sexual harassment policies and procedures were necessary, so the complaints by the women were not taken seriously. The human resources manager testified that she did not even know the definition of sexual harassment at the time of the events.

"This jury verdict sends the strongest possible message to employers that sexual harassment and retaliation should never be tolerated in the work place,” said EEOC attorney Faye A. Williams

It looks like 2011 is starting off with an increase in the number of sexual harassment complaints filed with the Illinois Department Of Human Rights ("IDHR") and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), at least by my office. There are probably good reasons for the increases, including the fact that employers are feeling with a high unemployment rate, they can treat employees in a poor fashion. Many times along with filing a complaint of sexual harassment, I also file a charge of retaliation. This happens because the employor will fire or take other negative action against an employee when they complain of being the victim of sexual harassment.

It is very important for people to realize that in Illinois they have 180 days from the last date of the sexual harassment or retaliation to file with the IDHR. They do have 300 days from the last date for file with the EEOC, but in my experience it is better to file with the IDHR as they actually investigate the charge. In any case it is very important to speak with an attorney and discuss the details of your case. Even if you just wish to settle the case quickly, you probably won't be taken seriously if you are not represented by counsel.

Rachelle Gray and Brianna Harvey, both former employees of King Cones ice cream shop claim its co-owner repeatedly made unwelcome sexual advances toward them and they both filed sexual harassment complaints. According to accounts which have been published, co-owner Eric Gavinsky propositioned both women while they worked for King Cones. Both women claim the sexual harassment was repeated and that Gavinsky would not take no for an answer.

The final straw came when their hours were cut after they refused to attend a swingers party. If they can prove this, they would have an additional claims of retaliation for refusing the sexual harassment and also a claim of constructive discharge. If an employee quits because the discrimination is to bad to continue working, it is called a constructive discharge. The other co-owner, Gavinsky’s wife, Pamela, observed some of the incidents and did nothing to stop it so she is also named in the lawsuit.

Pacific Seafood Group pays $85,000 to settle a retaliation lawsuit with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") filed on behalf of Jesus Perez. According to published accounts Pacific Seafood Group, Inc. illegally fired warehouse worker Jesus Perez after he complained to management about racial discrimination. Perez told his supervisor that he feared he had received a smaller raise than his non-Hispanic co-worker because of his race, he was told that if he was going to accuse the company of discrimination, they should part ways.

Perez was fired the same day he complained of alleged discrimination. This is the basis for his retaliation claim. If the company takes a negative job action against you based on your complaint of discrimination it is retaliation. In this case the evidence was clear, Perez was fired the same day he complained about a difference in pay based on race. The settlement amount is proof the company believed it did something wrong. Good job for Mr. Perez and his ability to hang tough and fight the company.

“I was shocked when they fired me.” “After working there for several years with a good record, I thought they would at least hear me out when I raised my complaint -- not fire me on the spot." Perez said.

First Student which operates a school bus company pays $150,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of four women. According to published accounts a male supervisor sexually harassed at least four women, including bus drivers and a human resources assistant The four female employees also the victims of retaliation and some were forced to quit,which would be a constructive discharge.

Details of the lawsuit include the supervisor maing constant explicit remarks about the employees' body parts and the sexual acts he wanted to perform on them. It got progressively worse and the sexual harassment turned physical when the supervisor exposed himself, grabbed the breasts of a bus driver and rubbed his private parts against her body.

Two Bloomington-Normal Public Transit System employees filed sexual harassment complaints against General Manager Jeffrey Logan with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR"). According to published accounts one employee alleged that Logan touched her arms during a meeting and her lower back while she was at a copier. The second employee said she complained of being sexually harassed on three separate occasions prior to filing her complaint with the IDHR.

Both employees said that when they complained, they were placed on administrative leave. If a company or organization takes a negative job action against an employee who complains about sexual harassment it could form the basis for an additional claim of retaliation. The case seems to be getting interesting as now Logan has been placed on administrative leave following a board meeting. Usually at this point the parties would explore settlement discussions and hopefully settle the case prior to a fact-finding conference by the IDHR.

Logan said he had no comment about the complaints.

Former student Daniel Papelino can sue a New York pharmacy college for sexual harassment and retaliation after he complained his chemistry teacher was making unwanted sexual advances on him. His case was initially thrown out by the lower court however, the the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overruled the lower court and is allowing the lawsuit. According to details which have been published, Papelino was a student at Union University's Albany College of Pharmacy and he alleges Deanne Nowak his chemistry professor constantly flirted with him, badgered him to go out with her, and offered to give him extra points on exams.

Things got even more sexual when the two met in Nowak's office. Papelino alleges Nowak put her backside in his face and touched his crotch. Papelino got to the point where he went to the associate dean of student affairs but only a show investigation was performed and Papelino ended up getting kicked out of the university. After going to the dean, Nowak started her own independed investigation into Papelino claiming he was cheating on an exam. Papelino was expelled from school for violating the honor code, however the appeals court found no evidence to support the allegation that Papelino was cheating.

Nowark allegedly told Papelino "Do you know how lonely I've been lately? I thought you might be interested in knowing that."

"Although Dean White was responsible for administering the student code, he did nothing to investigate Papelino's complaint," Judge Chin said. "He did not follow the procedures established by ACP [the college] for processing complaints of sexual harassment. He did not 'take care' of the situation as he had told Papelino he would."

Continue reading "Former Pharmacy College Students File Lawsuit Against Professor For Sexual Harassment" »

Former village employee Ann Kaczmarek settled her sexual harassment lawsuit against the village and the president Thomas Kempinski for $75,000. According to published accounts Kaczmarek alleged Kempinski and the Village Board engaged in retaliation against her for complaining about sexual harassment and ended up firing her. Kaczmarek alleged that Kempinski made sexually suggestive comments and inappropriately touched her during her employment with the village.

Kaczmarek also alleged Kempinski called her during non-work hours to discuss his personal matters and expected her to accompany him on his personal errands away from Village Hall. This would be easy to prove with cell phone records and perhaps witnesses who saw the two of them together around town during work hours. You can see by the size of the settlement that the evidence must have been pretty good in favor of Kaczmarek.

Deborah Cooke and Christina Rodino both lesbian fitness instructors filed a lawsuit claiming discrimination based on sexual orientation and the creation of a hostile work environment against gym owner David Barton and his gym David Barton Gym. According to published accounts both women were fired after they put up with antigay comments and sexual harassment. Some of the details of the lawsuit include allegations that Cooke was called Lesbian Deb and asked by a male coworker whether she was going to strap on a penis tonight.

When the women complained about the discrimination the owner fired them which would constitute retaliation. There are facts in this case which indicate the gym had a large gay membership and this type of behavior is not only illegal if proven but also from a business standpoint stupid. This blog will keep track of the lawsuit and post updates when they happen. My guess is the case will settle prior to trial like most lawsuits do.

They both claim they were asked to “engage in sexual relations with another woman at the workplace."

Continue reading "Lesbian Fitness Instructors File Hostile Work Environment Lawsuit Against Gym Owner" »

If you have been the victim of sexual harassment, a hostile work environment or retaliation you have options after your case has been found to have substantial evidence by the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR"). You can proceed to trial before an Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") at the Illinois Human Rights Commission ("IHRC") or you can file a complaint in the circuit court of the county where the discrimination took place. There is an additional tactical consideration. If the basis for the sexual harassment were say events that can also be alleged in a complaint of intentional infliction of emotional distress, you could file a complaint with the IHRC and a separate complaint in the circuit court for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress.

The basis for being able to file this additional complaint is found in a variety of court decisions. In Pavilon v. Kaferly, 561 N.E. 2d 1245, 204 Ill. App. 3d 235 (Ill. App. 1 Dist. 1990), the court held that the tort of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress required proof of more than was required for sexual harassment and served a different policy than that served by the Human Rights Act, therefore the claim was not preempted by the Human Rights Act. For this reason one could give consideration to whether there are facts sufficient to file a complaint for trial with the IHRC and also a claim in circuit court for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress. Such a claim needs to prove, the conduct involved is truly extreme and outrageous; second, the actor must either intend that his conduct inflict severe emotional distress, or know that there is at least a high probability that his conduct will cause severe emotional distress; lastly, the conduct must in fact cause severe emotional distress.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") completed its investigation and found a female Houston firefighter was subjected to a hostile work environment based on gender discrimination, sexual harassment and retaliation. According to published accounts firefighter Jane Draycott found sexual slurs scrawled on her locker after she complained about workplace conditions. The fire department has denied allegations of sexual harassment, gender discrimination and retaliation and the fire department has been unable to find those responsible.

In this case Draycott is not only fighting the city but also the Houston Professional Fire Fighters Association ("HPFFA"). The HPFFA is criticizing the EEOC's investigation saying not enough firefighters were interviewed. You would think the union would rally around one of its members when she is being treated in a discriminatory manner. I am glad the EEOC is sticking around and not letting this type of behavior stand. My guess is both parties will want to settle the case at this point and a settlement is probably near.

"There is reasonable cause to believe that the charging party was subjected to a hostile work environment based on her gender and was retaliated against for engaging in a protected activity," the EEOC said.

The city of Winder paid Sue Fowler, a former accounts payable manager $250,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit. According to published accounts of the settlement Fowler claimed that she was fired after filing a sexual harassment complaint. Being fired after filing a sexual harassment complaint would be retaliation. In order to prove Fowler was fired for a non-discriminatory reason the city would have to allege facts that would support some type of misconduct or lack of fitness for the job.

Fowler claimed she was dismissed shortly after complaining that finance director Leslie Ginn repeatedly made sexual advances toward her. She said Ginn repeatedly tried to entice her into a sexual relationship. I would suspect there was some pretty good evidence for the city to pay $250,000 to settle this case. If there were no evidence, I would imagion the city would just fight the case and win at trial. Fowler alleged city leaders chose to include her in some layoffs early in 2009 because of the sexual harassment complaint--which makes up her retaliation complaint.

Argentine Township settled a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by Blythe Amenson for $400,000. According to published details in the lawsuit Amenson was a former lieutenant with the Argentine Township Fire Department working for a little more than two-years. Amenson claimed Fire Chief William Harvey made unwelcome comments that were sexual in nature. The unwelcome conduct and communications created a hostile work environment for Amenson. There obviously was some good evidence or the township would not have paid this large amount of money.

On the retaliation count of the lawsuit Amenson was discharged from her position as lieutenant of the fire department by the fire chief and Argentine Township after being sexually harassed. The reason given for the discharge was for not reaching the fire run count, yet a male firefighter who had a lower run count, remained employed. When an employee complains of sexual harassment and then is discharged for a reason that seems dishonest, a retaliation complaint will usually follow. In this case, the discharge was within a short period of time of the sexual harassment complaint and the motivation for the discharge seemed obvious.

Amerson said "Not wanting to put any negative light on the fire department, as a whole, I miss all those people. The guys have been phenomenal and like family to me.”

Northwest Cosmetic Labs will pay $30,000 to settle a lawsuit based on national origin and retaliation. The lawsuit was first filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf on a British subject born in Zimbabwe. According to published accounts, the employee was hired after a series of phone interviews for a full-time paid internship in cosmetic formulation. She did not interview in person because she was living in England at the time. Upon her arrival in Idaho Falls, she was told by her supervisor that employees at the company would likely be surprised to find out that she was black, since she was British.

What really happened of course was the company saw she was black and did not want her to be an employee. What the company did was try to make it so she failed because she was not the white person they thought they were getting. She received little to no direction from her supervisors and was rarely given assignments, despite her repeated requests to be given work. Her treatment stood in stark contrast to that of the company’s two other interns, who were both Caucasian. She was fired a short time laster.

“Instead of encountering the exemplary American values of justice and equality, this young visitor was treated to discrimination and punishment for standing up for her rights,” said EEOC attorney Michael Baldonado.

Seymour ZX a franchisee of the Zaxby’s restaurant chain, pays $20,000 to settle a retaliation lawsuit first filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of two former employees. According to published lawsuit documements, two employees of a Zaxby’s were fired because they complained about sexual harassment. Both employees were fired on the same day and banned from the store. If someone complains of sexual harassment and is fired or has other negative job actions taken against him, it is referred to as retaliation and it is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

In this case the company should have taken the sexual harassment cases seriously and not fired to two workers. Shooting the messenger is never a good idea. There are more cases of retaliation taking place and employers need to educate themselves as to the legal ramifications if they choose to terminate employees for bring illegal acts to their attention. I am glad the EEOC was able to get to the bottom of this case and settle it in a manner that was good for the two fired employees.

“Retaliation charges have been on the rise for years, and it is a real concern,” said EEOC attorney Faye Williams.

Discrimination charges filed by workers against their employers have reached an all-time high according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). The discrimination that is taking place against workers is at an unprecedented level of 99,922 cases filed during 2010. During that same period of time the EEOC secured more than $404 million in monetary benefits from employers -- the highest level of monetary relief ever obtained by the Commission through the administrative process.

The EEOC broke the categories down into the top five in terms of the most cases that are filed. The numbers are as follows: Retaliation under all statutes (36,258), racial discrimination (35,890) Disability discrimination--Americans With Disabilities Act ("ADA") (25,165) age discrimination (23,264) and sexual harassment (11,717). I believe the increase in discrimination charges is a direct result of the bad economy and the belief by management that they can do what they want with employees and get away with it.

EEOC Chair Jacqueline A. Berrien said. "Discrimination continues to be a substantial problem for too many job seekers and workers, and we must continue to build our capacity to enforce the laws that ensure that workplaces are free of unlawful bias."

Testing company Measurement Inc. pays $110,000 to settle a religious discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Jacqueline Dukes. According to published accounts Measurement Inc. discriminated against Jacqueline Dukes when it fired her for refusing to work on her Sabbath. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating against employees and applicants because of their religion. Title VII requires employers to reasonably accommodate individuals as long as it does not create an undue hardship on the employer.

Dukes is a member of a Christian denomination called Children of Yisrael which prohibits its members from working on the Sabbath, from sunset on Friday until sunset on Saturday. The EEOC enforces federal law when it comes to employment issues related to discrimination. In this case, the employer could have made a reasonable accomodation for Dukes and this would have saved the company a great deal of money. The EEOC could have filed an additional charge of retaliation against the company for firing Dukes. Many times EEOC complaints will have multiple counts and allegations.

"Some employers still need to be educated that they are required by law to explore reasonable accommodations to solve situations like this,” said EEOC attorney Lynette A. Barnes.

David Chevrolet settled a sexual harassment lawsuit with three employees for $125,000. The lawsuit was first filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the employees who claimed the dealership created a hostile work environment for the salespeople. According to published accounts because of the sexual harassment the two women quit and the man was fired in retaliation when he complained about the hostile work environment.

Details of the sexual harassment and hostile work environment include exposing the two women to pornography, photos of topless women and lewd comments. The male employee claimed he was sexually harassed based on stereotypes of how a man should act, including assigning him a derogatory e-mail address and subjecting him to comments about highlights in his hair and crude sexual comments when it was learned he had a girlfriend.

Chevrolet attorney Hugh Carlin said "the company agreed to settle the claims because of the anticipated substantial expenditure of time and money necessary to successfully defend itself through trial.”

Eleven former employees of a grocery store called Paul's Big M claim the manager, Allen Manwaring, sexually harassed them physically and verbally over eight years. According to the females allegations Manwaring rubbed himself against them in a sexual way and also touched their breasts and buttocks. As if that weren't enough he also made sexual advances and vulgar comments to them. The sexual harassment lawsuit is finally coming to trial today and this blog will keep you updated as to the result.

Two of the young females were fired after they complained, which is considered retaliation. The other nine said they quit because of the harassment or retaliation, which is considered a constructive discharge. The case was first filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") and the EEOC conducted an investigation which substantiated the female workers claims.

“For many, the job at the company was the first they ever held and all were essentially half Mr. Manwaring’s age at the time they were first harassed,” the EECO said.

Just when the State of Illinois is facing serious economic troubles and things don't look like they can get much worse--they are. Aaron Anderson who is a former correctional officer at the Thomson Correctional Center in Illinois filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against the Illinois Department of Corrections ("IDOC") and two supervisors. In the lawsuit he seeks in excess of $400,000 plus attorney fees. Also named in the lawsuit are Joseph J. McCray and Randy Newstrand.

According to court documents Anderson claims he was the victim of sexual harassment while employed at the prison. His claims include his male supervisors making inappropriate sexual comments to him and inappropriately touching his groin and buttocks. Things only got worse when he complained to management which helped lead to this lawsuit. In fact Anderson claimed the IDOC engaged in retaliation against him for complaining by imposing a 10-day suspension.

"Anderson claims he was physically restrained and assaulted by other guards with a supervisor jokingly asking how he liked being sexually assaulted or raped."

Law firm Glancy Binkow & Goldberg is being sued by Ashlee IIewicz, a former employee for sexual harassment and wrongful-termination. According to published accounts right after the holiday party, founding partner Lionel Z. Glancy took employees to a bikini bar named Fantasy Island, paid for their admissions and bought a lap dance for at least one employee. The allegations include claims that female employees at the firm were subjected to a hostile work environment because senior attorneys were always discussing sex in the workplace and making sexual comments.

In what seems to be a remarkable claim, apparently one lawyer posted photographs of naked women on the wall of his office. Ilewicz worked as an investigator at the firm for 14 months before she was fired for complaining about the performance of an attorney and complaining about the hostile work environment. Being fired for complaining about this type of behavior would also rise to the level of retaliation.

"Glancy declined to comment"

John Arndt a former Transportation Security Administration ("TSA") worker was fired by the TSA and filed a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit against the agency--the lawsuit was dismissed because of procedural errors and is being appealed. The thrust of his allegations are that he was fired because he complained about sexual harassment from a female boss and as a result the agency engaged in retaliation against him. Of course there are two sides to every story and the TSA tells a different story. According to published court documents Arndt was a troublesome employee who was fired because he engaged in “harassing,” “irresponsible” and “confrontational” workplace behavior.

In court papers Arndt claims Buffalo TSA managers drummed him out of the agency because he had an affair with a high-ranking Buffalo TSA official and then broke off the affair. This makes up the majority of his retaliation claim in the lawsuit. Arndt said he broke off the affair because he was about to get married. After he told the women it was over she repeatedly called him, seeking to resume the affair. He refused, and the supervisor was promoted to a position above him. He claims this caused a hostile work environment for him and resulted in his termination.

“I filed a complaint of sexual harassment, and the TSA investigator who interviewed me told me, ‘Men don’t get sexually harassed, be a real man,’ ” Arndt said.

Dr. Edward Kleiner had a sexual harassment lawsuit filed against him by three former employees who accuse him of perverse transgressions. According to published accounts the three women allege he sexted them, groped them, offered weight-loss tips, exposed his penis, and once brought an inflatable sex doll to the office.

The most unusual allegation was that he instructed a married couple to have sex in the office bathroom to produce sperm for an artificial-insemination procedure on the wife. This goes beyond creepy.

"We heard constant banging against the wall," says Samantha Romanger, a 21-year-old administrative assistant.

Then Kleiner allegedly told Romanger and another administrative assistant, Lauren Schlanger, to join him in the exam room and witness the artificial insemination.

"I refused. I said, 'I don't like this, and I don't think its legal,' " Romanger said. "He said, 'One of you are coming in the room, end of story.' I felt violated. I don't want to hear anyone having sex. And we're the ones who have to clean the office."

Continue reading "Doctor Sued For Sexual Harassment" »

The Cheesecake Factory is being sued for sexual harassment after Michael Knight claims other male line chefs sexually harassed him and the Factory punished him when he complained. Punishing someone because they report sexual harassment is referred to as retaliation and is illegal. According to details in the lawsuit, Knight claims line chefs continually grabbed each others' buttocks and genitalia and simulated sexual intercourse in front of him.

For his retaliation claim he alleges that the company punished him and then fired him after he expressed his discomfort and complained. In what is the most disturbing allegation, somone put a sanitary pad on a serving of meatloaf that Knight was about to prepare for a customer. When Knight showed this to a person in charge, the person just smiled. This type of behavior creates a hostile work environment and obviously resulted in this lawsuit. The Cheesecake Factory settled a similar claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") for $345,000 last year. In that case the EEOC conclued the evidence:

"overwhelmingly showed that the men suffered sexually abusive behavior, including abusers directly touching victims' genitals, making sexually charged remarks, grinding their genitals against them, and forcing victims into repeated episodes of simulated rape."

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") said it received a record 99,922 charges in FY 2010, the highest number of charges in the agency’s 45-year history. The EEOC secured more than $319 million in monetary benefits for individuals which represents the highest level of relief obtained through administrative enforcement in the EEOC’s history. It is clear the EEOC is stepping up enforcement of discrimination throughout the country.

In Illinois if you are the victim of sexual harassment, gender discrimination, or many of the other types of discrimination that create a hostile work environment, you can contact my office to file a charge with the EEOC or the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") which automatically cross-files with the EEOC. I prefer to file with the IDHR because they have fewer cases and more staff to handle the cases. Also the state route in my opinion is a much faster way to proceed and have your case resolved. The EEOC does a good job, but just not as good as the IDHR when it comes to a speedy resolution.

“The EEOC is on the path toward rebuilding and on track to make further progress in the upcoming fiscal year to more efficiently and effectively enforce the federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination,” said EEOC Chair Jacqueline A. Berrien.

Continue reading "The EEOC Has Record Number of Discrimination Claims" »

Chicago-based Securitas Security Services will pay $65,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Sheilandra Walker. According to published accounts security guard Walker was subjected to sexual harassment by two male guards; one of whom was her supervisor. If someone is sexually harassed by their supervisor there is strict liability to the company.

The two guards subjected Walker to unwelcome sexual comments, gestures and sexual touching. In probably the most troubling details one of the guards engaged in conduct such as licking his lips and grabbing his crotch while staring at Walker’s breasts, and he would physically touch Walker by blocking the door of the guard shack when she tried to leave so that she had to brush up against him. Once the conduct was reported to management nothing was done to stop it. In fact, the company took a negative job action against Walker and this was the basis for the retaliation claim.

“Employees must be free to report harassment without fear of reprisal,” said EEOC attorney Lynette A. Barnes

Continue reading "Securitas Security Settles Sexual Harassment Lawsuit For $65,000" »

Sahara Hotel & Casino will pay $100,000 to settle a national origin discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC").
According to details which were published as part of the settlement, Sahara 's supervisors and coworkers continuously belittled and harassed Ezzat Elias, whose job entailed maintaining and delivering food to the hotel buffet, because of his Egyptian heritage. Mr. Elias had to endure many hostile work environment type commnets while doing his job. The commnets included, “Go back to Egypt,” “f-----g Egyptian,” and often referred to him as “Bin Laden.”

Elias also endured graffiti in the men’s locker room and elsewhere, targeting him with phrases such as “sand n----r” and “the Taliban must die.” You can imagion how difficult it would be to go to work every day under these types of conditions. Elias made repeated complaints to management about what was going on and management did nothing to stop it. Instead supervisors retaliated against Elias shortly after his initial complaint by increasing his workload, subjecting him to closer scrutiny, formally disciplining and ultimately suspending him.

“Under federal law, employees of all national origins are protected from this type of harassment,” said Anna Park, EEOC attorney.

Continue reading "Sahara Casino Settles Retaliation Lawsuit For $100,000" »

Akal Security pays $1.62 million to a class of 26 female security guards, settling a pregnancy discrimination lawsuit filed on behalf of them by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). Details which have been published claim Akal began a nationwide pattern and practice of forcing its pregnant employees, working as contract security guards on U.S. Army bases, to take leave and discharging them because of pregnancy. Akal also engaged in retaliation against one female by filing criminal charges against her because she filed a claim with the EEOC. That type of activity by a company is scarey and I am glad that the EEOC pursued this matter in an agressive fashion.

In addition to that type of behavior, Akal also created a hostile work environment by subjecting the women to less favorable terms and conditions of employment because of pregnancy, including preventing them from completing their annual physical agility and firearms tests or forcing them to take such tests before their certifications had expired. This type of large settlement should send a message to management that this type of behavior will not be tolerated and will be costly. To other companies that wish to hire Akal Security, I hope they will demand that any discrimination does not take place in the future.

“This is a very important settlement that will help protect an entire class of women from discrimination on account of pregnancy,” said EEOC Chair Jacqueline A. Berrien.

Tamara Byrd and other female employees who worked at the Holiday Inn Express in Simpsonville had a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed on their behalf by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to the lawsuit a new general manager who isn't named in the complaint, took over at the hotel and engaged in a pattern of harassing behavior toward Byrd and other female employees. The most troubling allegation was that two months after the manager was hired, Byrd was fired in retaliation for turning away repeated sexual advances including touching and complaining to company owners.

Byrd complained but the owners dismissed her complaints in one day without a thorough investigation. A week after she complained to corporate officials, the manager told Byrd that he had feelings for her and winked at her and Byrd was fired two days later. When a termination occurs a short time after complaining of discrimination or sexual harassment it is usually in retaliation for reporting the conduct.

Days Inn Hotel pays $50,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a spanish speaking female housekeeper. According to published accounts, a supervisor sexually harassed the housekeeper and when she complained to management they did nothing to stop it and even cut her hours.

The sexual harassment created a hostile work environment for the housekeeper. In the complaint it was alleged that the housekeeper was sexually assaulted, including being subjected to an attempted rape by a supervisor. This was a very serious sexual harassment case and I am glad the EEOC was able to help this woman and hold the company and supervisor accountable.

"The EEOC takes extreme forms of sexual harassment, like the attempted sexual assault in this case, extremely seriously," said Nedra Campbell, the EEOC attorney assigned to handle the case.

This case is a prime example of how much it could cost to defend a sexual harassment lawsuit. The city of Dallas spent nearly $1.4 million in legal fees defending itself in three sexual harassment lawsuits filed by four women against Dallas Fire-Rescue. The real interesting fact is that the women received a good deal less than $1.4 million. So the most obvious question is why not settle the lawsuits quickly and save the taxpayers money? Two of the females Cheryl HIll and Sherrir Lopez received a total of $225,000. A third employee Helen Watts settled her sexual harassment lawsuit for $30,000 and the fourth litigant Leanne Siri-Edwards case is still pending.

I believe it is a bad business decision to spend more money on legal fees than it cost to settle the cases. Basically, the city spent $1.4 million to defend claims that were settled for a total of $255,000. I don't know many successful business people who would run their business in that fashion. As an example of the type of sexual harassment the woman endured Ms. Hill found fluid in her coffee cup. Testing on the cup later confirmed that the fluid was semen. Hill said that although a male employee was later placed on paid leave after admitting to being the perpetrator, she was the victim of retaliation by her supervisors for filing the grievance.

Former Calista CEO Matthew Nicolai is being sued for sexual harassment. The sexual harassment lawsuit was filed by employee Emily Davenport and alleges Nicolai stalked her and used his position to professionally harm her after she broke off their year-long relationship in 2009. Davenport held a high ranking position and was the former president of Calista subsidiary Solstice Advertising. According to published accounts she was put on leave a week after she complained about the sexual harassment and then fired. Being fired for reporting sexual harassment is retaliation and it is illegal if proven.

Davenport said the company fired her under false pretenses, citing lackluster job performance. She also alleged that other members of Calista management were aware of Nicolai's relationship with her and that she broke it off. This type of activity creates a hostile work environment and is also part of the lawsuit. The fact that the company fired Nicolai shows the board must feel Nicolai was doing something wrong.

Leanna Fannon, a Platte County worker is suing the county auditor for sexual harassment,creating a hostile work environment and retaliation. Fannon worked in the county’s human resources office for fourteen years and currently works as a payroll specialist. According to published accounts she claims Auditor Siobhann K. Williams, a female, began making unwanted sexual advances toward her three years ago. The sexual harassment included comments about Fannon’s clothing and appearance. Additionally Williams at one point sent her flowers.

Fannon rejected the advances and told Williams she was married. For his part Williams is denying the claims. The claim of retaliation is based on the fact that Williams questioned Fannon's job performance and the Platte County Commission demoted Fannon. This type of activity creates a hostile work environment and resulted in the County Commission getting named in the lawsuit as well as Williams. Williams is also up for re-election.

“The allegations she is making are absolutely untrue and I am not a lesbian,” Williams said. “The timing is interesting because it is two weeks before I am up for re-election.”

Austin Foam Plastics pays $600,000 to settle a racial discrimination, sexual harassment, hostile work environment and retaliation lawsuit with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to published accounts Austin Foam subjected African-American employees to a racially hostile work environment, subjecting two male employees to a sexual harassment and fired one employee for opposing and reporting the discrimination and harassment.

The pubished accounts allege the harassment included black employees being routinely subjected to discriminatory intimidation, racially offensive comments, insults, cartoons and jokes. A female manager sexually harassed male employees by subjecting them to unwelcome sexual comments and unsolicited physical contact of a sexual nature. She also offered more favorable terms of employment to those males who went along with her sexual harassment and punished those that didn't.

“The law requires employers to take reasonable steps to prevent and to correct racial and sexual harassment,” said David Rivela, EEOC attorney.

Planet Ford pays $160,000 to settle a sexual harassment, age discrimination and racial discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). Published accounts claims that one employee was subjected to race discrimination by his supervisor and was retaliated against for complaining about the supervisor’s discriminatory conduct. Another employee was subjected to sexual harassment by the supervisor. The sexual harassment included comments of a sexual nature and taunts by the supervisor that the original complainant, who is heterosexual, was engaging in homosexual activities.

The supervisor also repeatedly berated the employee for being too old for the job and washed up in the industry. The supervisor repeatedly sabotaged the employees work efforts. Both employees complained to management but nothing was done by Planet Ford to put a stop to the conduct. In the end one employee transferred and one quit. This is considered retaliation by Planet Ford because they did nothing to stop the discrimination and forced the complaining employees into other positions as a result of their complaints.

“This settlement demonstrates that harsh treatment against workers because of their age and/or race, whether they are white or members of other races, will be aggressively opposed by the EEOC,” said EEOC Attorney Jim Sacher.

Debbie McPherson, human resource manager for the County settled her sexual harassment lawsuit for $600,000. According to the lawsuit she claimed top officials knew or should have known about sexual harassment directed toward her that was occuring in the Planning Department. The sexual harassment included the deputy director who sent pornography from his work computer and bragged about his supply of a sexual-performance drug.

Once McPherson came forward with her complaint, she was laid off from her $101,000-a-year position. Prior to being laid off and in what she believes was retaliation for complaining , her entire staff was moved to another floor, then reassigned. This type of behavior is usually not coincidence. In her lawsuit she claimed the formation of a hostile work environment and this type of settlement shows the other side agreed.

McPherson is now working in a similar job in Las Vegas.

"I have a marvelous job to go to. I can put this behind me. I couldn't be more delighted," McPherson.

A strip club called Papermoon will pay $95,000 to settle a racial discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to published accounts Papermoon subjected two black doormen to racial harassment, segregation, and differing terms and conditions of employment. The company also engaged in retaliation against white employees who complained about the treatment they witnessed.

Managers at the Papermoon referred to black employees using offensive racial slurs, forced black employees to work in the back of the club instead of at the club entrance, and complained that “black music makes the club look bad.” Additionally company managers did not stop the harassment, but instead either forced out or fired white employees who opposed the abusive conduct. This type of behavior is not tolerated and is illegal. As you can see this type of activity cost the club almost $100,000.

“It is important for employers to recognize that this type of racial discrimination has no place in the modern workplace,” said EEOC Attorney Robert Weisberg. “Employers must treat employees of all races with dignity.”

Concrete company Bardon, Inc. pays $325,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to published accounts Bardon created and maintained a hostile work environment for Ora L. Borrell -- the only female quality control technician employed at the company.

The sexual harassment included repeated public urination in her presence, overt and explicit sexual comments and requests, touching and grabbing against her will and other sexually offensive conduct while on the job. This type of activity at work is against the law and will cost a company money each and every time. Borrell’s managers were aware of the sexual harassment because they witnessed some incidents. Borrell was subsequently fired by the company’s human resources department in retaliation for opposing these discriminatory practices.

“Sexual harassment continues to be a persistent problem 45 years after the enactment of Title VII, which prohibits gender discrimination in employment,” said EEOC Attorney Debra M. Lawrence.

East Hawaii Veterinary Center a veterinary clinic is being sued for sexual harassment, gender discrimination and retaliation by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). The lawsuit was filed by the EEOC on behalf of at least six female employees, ranging from receptionists to a veterinarian, who were subjected to extremely offensive, vulgar comments geared solely toward female staff by a co-owner of the clinic. The male staff members were not subjected to any of this type of behavior.

On a near-daily basis, the co-owner insulted the women by calling them “worthless,” “whores” and other extremely vulgar epithets, and generally treated the women differently. When one of the females complained about what was going on, a different co-owner took no action to stop it and fired at least three of the females which is retaliation. Others were forced to quit and this is referred to as a constructive discharge. A constructive discharge takes place when the company takes steps to make work so miserable for a worker that the worker is forced to quit. This type of behavior by professionals is remarkable and will end up costing them money.

“Supervisors and top managers have a higher duty to ensure a workplace free of hostility,” said Anna Y. Park, EEOC attorney “Women have the right to work without the utter degradation displayed here, and the EEOC will fight to ensure that employers pay for such injustices.”

Fry's Electronics is being sued for sexual harassment of a young female employee and retaliation for actions it took against her supervisor after he spoke out on her behalf. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of America Rios. According to published documents an assistant manager began to sexually harass sales associate America Rios who was under 21 years old at the time. Rios repeatedly refused his advances but the harasser continually sent her sexually charged text messages with invitations to his house and offers of alcohol.

Rios reported the sexual harassment to her immediate supervisor, Ka Lam. Lam immediately spoke to upper management about the sexual harassment and was told to focus on his job and that some changes might be happening. A very short time after Lam reported the sexual harassment he was fired for poor performance, even though the EEOC found that he had never received a bad review and had consistently been promoted during his four years with the company.

“This was my first job,” said Rios. “I was overwhelmed, uncomfortable, stressed out, and I didn’t know what to do. I tried to let it go, but I felt violated and didn’t know how to pretend that nothing happened.”

“I worked hard for this company, and tried to do what was right by standing up for Ms. Rios,” said Lam. “Firing me for speaking out was wrong.”

Continue reading "Fry's Electronics Sued For Sexual Harassment" »

A McDonald's franchise pays an female ex-employee $15,000 to resolve her sexual harassment lawsuit which also included a charge of retaliation. Published accounts claim that cashier Gladys Rivera was subjected to consistent sexual harassment by a male co-worker for several months. She claims that a supervisor and restaurant manager knew of the sexual harassment and did nothing to stop it. She kept complaining about the sexual harassment and was terminated because she would not stop complaining. This is called retaliation.

Rivera also alleged the same co-worker slapped her on the backside and said Rivera looks good. Although McDonalds denied that Rivera was sexually harassed, several witnesses interviewed by the human rights division supported Rivera's version of events. I suspect that the additional witnesses are what caused the company to settle the case. In Illinois you can file a claim of sexual harassment with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") and they will cross-file with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC").

Rivera alleged that a co-worker, Edwin Andujar of Newark, invited her to get together in private and "see how much of a man I am."

Roberts Truck Center is being sued for sexual harassment and retaliation by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC")on behalf of a class a female workers. According to published accounts of the sexual harassment, a co-worker employed by Roberts subjected Katherine Abernathy and a class of women, including at least three others, to sexual harassment. When the EEOC files a lawsuit based on a class of discriminated workers, there is usually a very good case. In this instance I believe this case is going to cost Roberts a great deal of money to settle.

Published documents allege the women were subjected to sexual comments, sexual innuendo and unwelcome touching of their bodies, which created a hostile work environment for them. Additionally, Abernathy suffered retaliation with respect to sales opportunities and in the terms and conditions of her employment because she opposed the sexual harassment. Abernathy was fired because she opposed the unlawful employment practices which is referred to as retaliation.

"Our investigation revealed that a co-worker of these women was permitted to harass them and Roberts Truck Center managers did not act promptly to provide corrective relief,” said EEOC attorney Rayford Irvin

The Holiday Inn is being sued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") for sexual harassment. According to published accounts the Holiday Inn fired front desk clerk Beatriz Garcia for complaining about being sexually harassed by her boss. Firing her for reporting sexual harassment would be retaliation and is an additional charge that Holiday Inn is being charged with. According to the complaint, Garcia was subjected of unwelcome touching, sexual comments and threats in response to complaining about the sexual harassment from a supervisor.

Garcia was fired in retaliation for complaining about the harassment to Holiday Inn management and faced further retaliation for filing a complaint with the EEOC. This type of behavior is not tolerated and what really makes things bad is her former manager at the Holiday Inn called her new employer in an attempt to warn him about Garcia and obtain her new contact information. This type of activity will be the undoing of the case for Holiday Inn and I suspect they will settle rather than go to trial.

"I came to this country to work hard and achieve the American Dream. Soon after being promoted, I realized that the promotion came at a price I did not want to pay. I could not continue to work where I was being treated as a sexual object." Garcia said.

"By law, employers must protect their workers and take responsibility for the actions of their supervisors," said EEOC attorney William Tamayo.

Continue reading "Holiday Inn Sued For Sexual Harassment" »

Mineral Met pays $440,000 to settle a racial discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to published accounts, a class of black employees was subjected to racial hostility and discriminatory behavior at Mineral Met’s Cleveland facility. The examples of the discrimination are plentyful. Quality Control Supervisor Langston Satterwhite had an excellent work history, but a white supervisor unfairly disciplined him for trivial matters, such as having facial hair or using a cell phone, even though white co-workers were not reprimanded for doing the same things.

Satterwhite complained to upper management about the racial discrimination he and other black employees experienced, but these complaints only resulted retaliation. Also once Satterwhile came forward and complained the company moved his office from the second floor, where other managers worked, and placed him in the basement with his subordinates. This type of behavior is obviously discriminatory and one has to wonder what the company was thinking. At the end of the day, companies are going to be held accountable for their actions and should think twice about how they handle situations.

“I am very pleased that Mineral Met has agreed to a settlement that not only remedies the harmed individuals, but implements policies preventing reoccurrence of such egregious behavior,” said EEOC Attorney Debra Lawrence.

A San Juan hospital pays $50,000 to settle a religious discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Javier Gonzalez-Torres. According to published accounts of the lawsuit, Torres claims the hospital failed to accomodate his religious beliefs. Torres worked at the hospital as a registered nurse and told the hospital that he could not cut his hair because of his religion, Santeria.

The hospital refused to allow him to wear his hair long, even though the hospital has a policy allowing female employees to wear their hair any length. If that weren't bad enough the hospital retaliated against Gonzalez-Torres by firing him after he complained about the discrimination. There seem to more be men filing discrimination charges with the EEOC. I don't know why the hospital would have a problem letting a man have the same length of hair a women does.

“Employers must reasonably accommodate employees’ religious beliefs and practices, and there is no gender distinction for that,” said EEOC Attorney Michael O’Brien.

A jury awarded Keri Gall, a former barn manager $930,000 after finding that her termination from the Funny Farm Inc., was retaliation for reporting sexual harassment. According to published articles, Gall claimed another male worker tried to hug her and kiss her on the lips during her employment. Gall reported the sexual harassment to the owner who terminated her 6 1/2 weeks later.

Maybe the best piece of evidence was the fact that only five days before being fired the owner offered Gall a $70,000 severance package if she left voluntarily. That offer was not accepted. You can see by the size of the severance package that the owner must have felt there was a strong case for the sexual harassment. This award seems very high but you have to realize that she was terminted and depending on how long it takes to find a job and what the income level was, the damages can add up. Also in this case the jury awarded a large amount in punitive damages.

Gall said she was "very happy" with the award. "I would have loved to let go and move on," she said. "It was something I had to do for my family."

Cheryl Lockard is awarded $63,045 in her sexual harassment and retaliation case against the Rev. Keith Jones and the First Baptist Church of Canton Illinois. The Illinois Human Rights Commission declined further review of a matter in which administrative law judge Michael Robinson ruled in favor of Lockard and issued the award. Lockard is a former employee of the church and claims she was sexually harassed by Jones and once she reported the sexual harassment the church engaged in retaliation and fired her.

The church appealled the decision by Judge Robinson with the Illinois Human Rights Commission and the Commission upheld Judge Robinson's order. Along with paying Lockard $63,045 the Church and Jones must also pay her attorney fees, issue a neutral job reference letter and clear her work record. It is unusual to file an appeal with the Illinois Human Rights Commission because of the cost involved (in legal fees) and the narrow avenue for having the Judge's ruling overturned.

Continue reading "Illinois Church Ordered To Pay $63,045 In Sexual Harassment Case" »

It looks like being an interior decorator is a pretty good way to make a living-that is if you have ties to the housing authority. According to published reports, the Philadelphia Housing Authority ("PHA") will pay through its' insurance company $250,000 to settle a sexual harassment claim against executive director Carl R. Greene. The claim was first filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") by Elizabeth Helm, 29, a former interior decorator with PHA. According to her allegations Greene made advances including touching, grabbing, and groping her. Helm repeatedly told Greene to stop but Greene continued to forcibly and physically pursue inappropriate and unwanted contact of an intimate nature with her.

Because of this sexual harassment Helm was advised by her doctor not to return to work. She requested a medical leave, but was denied one by PHA. Because she was denied she took her vacation time and when it was exhausted and she did not return to work, PHA stopped paying her. She then applied for unemployment and PHA engaged in retaliation by fighting her claim. Fighting unemployment when allegations like this are brought to the attention of management is just stupid. It only makes the person want to pursue a claim and makes the amount available to them in damages increase. Additionally, if a person is unable to continue at work because of the discriminatory actions that are taking place at work, it is called a constructive discharge.

Mary Clark a former Moline Public Library worker settled her retaliation lawsuit with the city of Moline for $1 million. According to published reports Clark who worked for the library for 24-years, claimed Leslie Kee a retired library director fired her in retaliation for complaints she made against the director. It all started back in 2008 when Clark complained to the library board alleging Kee was creating a hostile work environment, and acting in a vulgar and offensive manner. The lawsuit claimed that Kee and the City of Moline were discriminating based on sexual harassment, racial discrimination and national origin. In cases like this it is not unusual to have multiple claims of discrimination. She is basically saying I complained about all these types of behavior and as a result I was retaliated against by being fired.

After the complaint to the board Kee was reprimanded for her behavior and one month later, Kee recommended to the library board that Clark’s position be eliminated to save money. Clark was fired and based on the close proximity to her complaint, one could see the retaliation. The city was fighting the lawsuit but statements began to emerge that hurt the city's case and they decided to settle. You can see how important it is to have documents that are favorable to your case. In this case, a million dollar settlement was reached because of the documents.

“The city and insurance company were surprised and disappointed by the content of those statements,” city officials said.

Continue reading "Former Moline Illinois Public Library Worker Gets $1 Million for Retaliation Lawsuit" »

Ann Marie LaFauci a State Police office worker filed a sexual harassment lawsuit, alleging that a female lieutenant continually flirted with her, then bullied and threatened her after she rejected the advances. According to the lawsuit LaFauci claims Detective Lieutenant Barbara J. Bennett repeatedly called her “girlfriend,’’ once joked that she should wear a thong to work, and often insisted the two be alone for lunch or while driving to meetings. Bennett married her longtime female companion in 2004 after Massachusetts legalized same-sex marriage. Bennett serves as the State Police liaison to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender community.

This is an unusual case as it not only involves sexual harassment but also sexual orientation discrimination and woman on woman sexual harassment. LaFauci alleges that she was upset by the overtures and told Bennett to stop at which point Bennett cut her hours, unfairly disciplined her, and told her, “Who knows, AnnMarie, accidents happen, they could find you in the back parking lot with blood pouring out of your head.’’ All of those would constitute retaliation and should not happen in the workplace.

“The way she was treating me was almost like a jealous ex- boyfriend being overpossessive,’’ said LaFauci, adding that she was once ordered to fetch toiletries from Bennett’s locker. “And when I told her I couldn’t be treated that way, she snapped.’’

Continue reading "Female State Police Officer Sues For Sexual Harassment " »

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") filed a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit against Garfield Medical Center alleging the hospital allowed a male worker to sexually harass an entire class of female workers. According to reports which were published, the sexual harassment included inappropriate touching and rubbing of body parts, propositions for romantic dates and sex-for-pay, graphic discussions of sexual activities, vulgar comments regarding female employees’ body parts, and even obscene comments regarding underage patients at the facility.

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.”

A jury awarded $900,000 to five black police officers in a retaliation and racial discrimination lawsuit. The jury believed the officers version of events that they had been punished for complaining about racial discrimination. According to testimony at trial the officers who worked in the vice unit, complained twice about alleged discrimination in the vice unit. However, after they complained management labeled them troublemakers and their real problems began.

Management began to retaliate by withholding information needed to do their jobs, such as the presence of armed suspects in their vicinity. Within weeks of the officers' formal complaint, all five were removed from the unit and given lesser posts which the jury viewed as retaliation. I am glad to see these officers stick up for themselves and pursue this matter until the end. Before filing their lawsuit they first had to file a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC").

There is a real danger to making a false sexual harassment claim against somebody. A jury this month rejected the sexual harassment and retaliation claims a paralegal made against her former boss, lawyer Thomas Ostly, instead awarding him $1.55 million in damages in his defamation counter-suit. That is a serious amount of money and should make people think long and hard about making up false information in an attempt to get some fast money by filing a sexual harassment lawsuit.

The jury after hearing testimony determined paralegal Allison Moreno, acted with malice and oppression, laying the groundwork for awarding Ostly punitive damages. Morena claimed Ostly fired her when she refused to continue a sexual relationship with him. She said she felt pressured to have sex with her boss, and that she did so to protect her job and her plan to attend law school. The jury did not believe her and instead ruled in favor of Ostly.

"The system is not to be used improperly," Ostly said.

Lisa Easi, who was employed as an administrative assistant to chief deputy Terry Tichava, settled her sexual harassment lawsuit against him and the department for $188,000. According to her complaint, Tichava would touch her, make lewd comments and force her into lewd sexual positions. The sexual harassment also included sexual jokes. Easi complained to Tichava's superiors however nothing was done to stop the sexual harassment.

Easi claims she was fired after she filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). This would also be referred to as retaliation. When people settle their lawsuits they don't admit liability as part of the settlement however, paying this large amount of money gives you an idea of the truth of the allegations.

Hilltown Packing Company settles sexual harassment lawsuit for $48,000. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Filomena Ruelas and other women who worked for the company. According to published reports, Ruelas and others were sexually harassed by their supervisor and then the company engaged in retaliation when they opposed the sexual harassment.

The company which packages Broccoli denied any wrongdoing but the settlement amount should serve as evidence as to what really happened. Supervisors are in a position of authority over employees and they must act in a responsible manner. I am glad that the EEOC stepped in and held the company responsible.

“Women in the agricultural industry are particularly vulnerable to sexual harassment, especially immigrant women who may not be proficient in English and are unaware of their employment rights,” said EEOC Attorney William R. Tamayo.

The Musselman Company will pay $300,000 to a class of female workers to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed the by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the women. In court papers the EEOC alleged a class of female farmworkers was subjected to sexual harassment by male coworkers at its processing plant. The sexual harassment included lewd comments and unwanted sexual advances.

The male coworkers also used a forklift to chase women as they walked down the hall. The company wrongfully disciplined or reassigned employees in retaliation for their complaints about the abusive treatment. The EEOC was able to hold the company responsible and make them pay a significant amount of money.

"The EEOC has seen a troubling number of sexual harassment charges filed by farmworkers across the country,” said Debra Lawrence, the regional attorney of the EEOC"

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

A federal district court ordered an employer to stop questioning Hispanic farm workers who filed charges of sexual harassment and retaliation with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") concerning their immigration status, employment history and, in one woman’s case, her sexual history. The employer is this case was trying to kick up as much dirt as possible to distract from what was really taking place.

The Judge reasoned that the public interest would be far better served if meritorious discrimination claims were filed by immigrants regardless of their status. Another words, if people have to fear being deported or getting into immigration trouble they are less likely to come forward and complain about sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination.

An Elks Lodge in Jerseyville Illinois will pay $107,500 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit which was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of three female bartendors. According to the lawsuit the club’s trustees sexually harassed the three female bartenders. Details of the claims include that three trustees made repeated unwelcome sexual advances and sexually explicit comments to three bartenders but when the women complained, they were threatened, their hours were cut and they were assigned the least desirable shifts. This type of treatment is also referred to as retaliation.

One woman was fired, and the other two felt forced to quit. When an employee feels that because of discrimination directed toward them they must quit their job, the legal term utilized to describe it is constructive discharge. As part of the settlement, the Elks Lodge also agreed to conduct sexual harassment training for Elks managers and employees and to report complaints of sex harassment made by Elks employees to the EEOC regional attorney for a period of three years

Carmel City will pay $600,000 to settle a sexual harassment and age discrimination lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed against the city because allegedly the city's top administrator Rich Guillen sexually harassed Jane Kingsley Miller, the city's human resource manager. After Miller rejected the sexual advances she claims Guillen engaged in retaliation. Miller alleged in her lawsuit that the office was a buzz with sexual activity and two women who had sex with Guillen were rewarded while her position was eliminated after she refused to have sex with Guillen.

In the lawsuit Miller alleged that what was going on in the office was common knowledge around City Hall and nothing was done to stop it. Miller was 63 years old and anyone over the age of 40 may allege age discrimination if they have facts to support it. Cases like this show how public entities throw tax payer money around like there is a printing machine in the back room. I don't know what Miller was making per year in salary but the smarter thing to do would have been to buy her position out and retire her once she came forward with complaints. Also, if the city had investigated this properly, and put a stop to it, perhaps they could have saved a great deal of money. By paying this amount of money, the city realized it had a losing case, the typical language about paying to end litigation but not acknowledging liability is laughable when you pay over half a million dollars.

"By resolving this matter and avoiding months of litigation and expense we can look forward to redirecting more energy and resources to the many challenges facing the city in these uncertain economic times," the city's press release said.

Adecco settled a retaliation lawsuit that was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") for $62,500. According to published accounts, Adecco disciplined and fired Jeffrey A. Byard, a former office supervisor because he spoke out in support of his supervisor when she complained of sexual harassment by her boss. In sexual harassment and other discrimination cases, they people who are part of the investigation also have protections.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it unlawful to retaliate against an employee because he testified, assisted, or participated in a proceeding protected that law. I see many cases where the company retaliates against people who are involved in an internal investigation and it ends up costing the company more to settle those cases than the original case. This company needs better internal processes in place with regard to conducting a proper investigation. I bet after paying this amount of money they will put better processes in place.

“Claims of retaliation are taken very seriously by the EEOC,” said Mary Jo O’Neill, EEOC Attorney. “Employers cannot take action against employees because of their participation in employment discrimination claims, either as a witness or because the employee gave a statement, as Mr. Byard did."

Vandy Glenn a transgender woman won a gender discrimination lawsuit against the Georgia General Assembly, after she was fired because she started to transition from male to female. Glenn, was hired as editor of the State Office of Legislative Counsel five years ago and a year after she was hired, she decided to change from a male to a female. She was terminated from her position after Sewell Brumby, the director of the office said he worried how other people would react. This could have been a retaliation lawsuit because she was fired in retaliation for not conforming to the illegal views of her supervisors.

I would like to congratulate Glenn on her victory and on hanging tough and protecting her rights. Getting fired while you continue to do a great job is unconscionable. It amazes me that some organizations still live in the stone age and can't quite get their brains around the idea that not all people are the same. This country was built on individuals rights and allowing people the freedom to live how they choose within the law. Vandy Glenn by all accounts was a great worker and deserved to be treated much better than this. I am glad she is getting her just rewards. The court will be holding a damages hearing later and I hope her bank account gets full.

Sewell Brumby said that "lawmakers would view her transition as immoral."

Billboard company Trinity Products, Inc. pays $55,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a female assistant. According to the published documents in the lawsuit a high-level manager sexually harassed the assistant with offensive language and gestures. Additionally the manager asked the assistant for sexual favors.

The female rejected the advances and because of that the manager tried to replace her. She also complained about the conduct of her manager and that resulted in her discharge. Such conduct is called retaliation. It is unlawful to fire someone because they are complaining about sexual harassment. This is a classic case of the company trying to sweep a person complaining under the rug. Hoepfully the company will spend some time training its' managers and other high ranking employees on discrimination law and give them a primer on sexual harassment.

“Federal law mandates a workplace free from sexual harassment and retaliation for reporting such misconduct,” said Barbara A. Seely, attorney of the EEOC.

The only thing worst than being subjected to sexual harassment and retaliation for either reporting the sexual harassment or rejected the advances is to not be able to prove your case and therefore be left holding the bag. It is very important to have either a witness or a tangile piece of evidence that will support your allegation. I won't spend much time on the witness because if you have one, that person can speak to what happened. One thing I would say about witnesses in general are that sometimes they are reluctant to come forward because they fear for their job. The point is, sometimes you think you have witnesses but when it comes right down to it, you won't.

The next best evidence are the words from the harasser. The best way to get his words are if he leaves a voice message or is he sends you a text or email. Remember in Illinois you can't record someone without their permission. On the other hand if the person leaves a voice message, he is consenting by leaving the message so saving his message is legal and you can utilize this at trial. If your harasser sends you a text message save it and get in touch with an attorney early on so he can show you how to properly save the text message for use later on. Your case will first be filed with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") and 90% of all cases settle so there is a good chance you will never have a trial.

Continue reading "Proving Your Sexual Harassment Lawsuit" »

The state of Oregon and former Public Safety Standards and Training director John Minnis pays $450,000 to a woman who had accused Minnis of sexual harassment. Minnis no longer works in his position as he was forced to quit after the allegations in the lawsuit became public. The woman who remains annonymous worked for Minnis and alleged that he sexually harassed her at the job and exploited her alcoholism in attempts to seduce her on business trips.

What was utilized to prove the sexual harassment was a timeline of events that was out of place along with the statement of the woman. In this case Minnis promoted the woman then gave her a raise that was out of the norm. Minnis and Doe attended a work-related conference in Bend and at that conference Minnis groped Doe in a hot tub and in his room, but she told him that she was not interested. Even though this would be her word against his, the other evidence provided a story of its own.

Continue reading "Woman Receives $450,000 To Settle Sexual Harassment Lawsuit" »

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.

Adecco Staffing will pay $12,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit which was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a group of female workers. According to published accounts, a supervisor frequently made lewd and sexually offensive remarks to the female workers. He also allegedly rubbed himself against them, hugged them and slapped them on the buttocks.

The workers complained to Adecco officials but nothing was done to stop the sexual harassment. In fact, the company not only failed to intervene on their behalf but continued to assign female employees to work under the alleged harasser. Adecco then retaliated against one of the workers by firing her, while another was forced to quit because of the “ongoing and intolerable harassment. When a worker is forced to quit because of sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination it is known as a constructive discharge.

Continue reading "Adecco Staffing Pays $12,000 To Settle Sexual Harassment and Retaliation Lawsuit" »

The Community College of Baltimore County pays $50,000 to settle an age discrimination and retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Sheri Chosak. Chosak was a 60-year old employee who was trying to get hired as a part-time English as a Second Language (ESOL) academic advisor but claims she was denied the job because of her age. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA") prohibits employers from refusing to hire or promote individuals who are 40 or older because of age.

This type of case illustrates why employees have to work hard to protect their rights and if they believe they are the victim of discrimination, they must fight. It seems in this tough economy many employers are taking the attitude that they can do anything regarding employment decisions and not be held accountable. Good for this woman and her ability to stand her ground and fight for her rights.

“Employers who refuse to hire qualified applicants based on age not only forgo the opportunity to hire talented workers, they also risk having to defend themselves against an EEOC lawsuit,” said EEOC Attorney Debra Lawrence

A former California Conservation Corps supervisor who was fired for reporting sexual harassment has been awarded $159,000 in a jury verdict. The case involved 66-year-old Margaret Grodzik. She worked at the Corps for three years and was fired after she reported sexual harassment and other misconduct including retaliation.

During trial Grodzik testified that the female corps members were subjected to rape, sexual harassment and retaliation by their male counterparts and that many of the women suffered injury. The jury obviously found her credible and awarded her some substantial money. It is always nice to see someone stand up and take on their employer. Jury trials have advantages and disadvantages. One advantage is that a jury can put themselves in your shoes and feel your pain, whereas a Judge is more likely to become less emotional.

MRA Systems Inc., a subsidiary of General Electric pays $130,000 to settle an age discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of 61 year old Louis Behrendt. According to the lawsuit MRA Systems gave Behrendt a lower performance rating, despite his successful job performance, because of his age. Additionally, the company failed to assign Behrendt to a position as a Production Control Leader 5 and instead awarded the position, which had greater salary potential, to a younger, less-qualified employee.

This type of behavior is against the law and usually can be proven with performance evaluations and other documents in personal files. In addition to not promoting him the company subjected him to unfair and heightened job scrutiny, gave him poor performance ratings and refused to promote him based on his age and in retaliation for his internal complaints about discrimination. Many times retaliation complaints are also filed with charges of discrimination.

"Age-based stereotypes about the abilities of older workers can result in older employees receiving lower performance ratings, lower compensation, and fewer promotional opportunities than younger co-workers," said EEOC Attorney Debra Lawrence

Continue reading "MRS Systems Settles Age Discrimination Lawsuit For $130,000" »

TIN, Inc., settles age discrimination lawsuit for $250,000. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employ­ment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of three employees over the age of 40. According to details in the lawsuit, the company took employment actions in favor of younger workers and adverse to the three workers who were over 40. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 ("ADEA") protects people 40 years of age or older from employment discrimin­ation based on age and from retaliation for complaining about it.

This type of behavior against older workers is not tolerated and will result in a discrimination lawsuit. Most of the workforce is over 40-years of age and usually older workers make more money because they have more experience. Some business owners believe they can cut costs by firing the older workers and replacing them with younger, less expensive workers. Employers beware if this is your strategy.

“Workers over 40 often possess extensive job experience and skills, yet are still vulnerable to discrimination,” said EEOC Regional Attorney Mary Jo O’Neill. “Employers must look beyond age when making life-changing decisions for employees such as hiring and firing.”

My website lasorsalaw.com generates many inquires about sexual harassment cases in Illinois and throughout the country. Even though I have videos on the website to walk people through the steps of filing a lawsuit or complaint regarding sexual harassment, people still have many of the same questions. I hope to answer a few here with this general post. The first decision a person must make is whether to file a complaint of sexual harassment with the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). With the IDHR, a person has 180 days from the date of the last sexual harassment to file a complaint, with the EEOC the person has 300 days to file a complaint of sexual harassment.

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.

Continue reading "Filing A Sexual Harassment Complaint With The Illinois Department of Human Rights" »

Kimberly Passananti was awarded a whoping $4.1 million by a federal jury in her sexual harassment lawsuit. She filed the lawsuit against Cook County alleging sexual harassment by her supervisor. According to details in the lawsuit, Passananti was sexually harassed by John Sullivan at the sheriffs department. Passananti alleged during the trial that she was terminated from her position as deputy director of the Day Reporting Center.

During trial she accused Sullivan of spreading false rumors among colleagues that Passananti engaged in sexual relations with an inmate she supervised, made repeated unwanted sexual advances and called her "bitch" on numerous occasions. Passananti was fired and the reason given for her termination was that her position had been eliminated. However, a male was hired to replace her and the reason given to her was just pretextural. It is often called retaliation when someone fires you for opposing sexual harassment.

"Sullivan intentionally subjected plaintiff to unequal and discriminatory treatment by creating a hostile and abusive work environment that altered the condition of plaintiff's employment," according to court papers.

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.

The Dudley Perkins Company, the country’s oldest Harley Davidson motorcycle dealership, will pay $55,000 to settle a gender discrimination and retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Bowen Dean a female employee. According to the lawsuit, Dean was not allowed to work as a mechanic, while hiring less qualified men for the same position.

In many different professions that are dominated by men, females have a hard time breaking into their ranks. This is a classic case of a qualified female not being able to work in a job solely because of her gender. It is nice to see her pursue her rights and hold the company accountable. The EEOC also did a great job making sure she was compensated.

“Breaking into jobs in non-traditional fields continues to be a challenge for women, and despite the prohibitions on sex discrimination written into federal law in 1964, some sex segregation in employment continues,” said EEOC Attorney William R. Tamayo.

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.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") filed a religious discrimination lawsuit on behalf of a Thomas Kokezas claiming he was discriminated against because he wasn't a certain religion and because of his age. Additionally the EEOC said Orkin engaged in retaliation against an applicant who complained to the company’s corporate headquarters about the alleged discrimination.

The age discrimination lawsuit claims Orkin discriminated during the hiring process against Thomas Kokezas, as well as a class of individuals based on their age, over 40, or religion, non-Mormon. The lawsuit alleges Orkin advertised on Craig’s List for a recruiter to assist in hiring LDS missionaries for seasonal employ­ment and stating that the summer position was great for returned missionaries, who tend to be in their 20s. Under the law such advertising is illegal because it shows a preference for a particular religion, and also a preference for younger workers.

“Employers must be vigilant in providing equal employment opportunities for all applicants regardless of their age or religion,” said EEOC Attorney Mary Jo O’Neill.

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

Amino Transport, Inc. and Chariot Express, Inc. will pay $50,000 to settle a retaliation, religious and pregnancy discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Joshua Male. According to the lawsuit Male’s employer engaged in retaliation firing him because he had complained about workplace comments being made by two coworkers. The lawsuit also claims Male complained to the human resources ("HR") manager about persistent inappropriate jokes about Mormons, as well as workplace comments allegedly disparaging a pregnant female co-worker, women in general, and an African American.

The HR manager reported Male's complaints to the general manager of the facility, and Male was fired within less than 72 hours. This type of behavior is so obvious and it is amazing that companies still believe they can get away with treating people this way. It is nice to see people stand up for their rights and not let companies operate in this fashion.

“No one should lose his job for alerting human resources to inappropriate workplace behavior,” said EEOC attorney Jim Sacher.

The University of New Hampshire pays $220,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by Amy Kallianpur, a former professor. According to the lawsuit, Kallianpur alleged she was the victim of sexual harassment by her boss, department Chairman Chuck Gross. She accused Gross of making sexually offensive statements such as repeatedly telling her that he loved her and demanding that she tell him that she loved him. Gross also allegedly made demands that they share a hotel room. Kallianpur first filed her complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") and then filed a lawsuit in federal court.

Kallianpur complained to management about the sexual harassment and management refused to intervene and stop it. After Kallianpur complained Gross and the school engaged in retaliation against her by not renewing her contract. Gross no longer works at the University as he retired prior to the settlement of the lawsuit. It is always nice to see people stand up when they are being discriminated against.

"He threatened her by telling her a story about a student who intended to complain against him, and how he preempted her complaint by giving her a failing mark so as to damage her credibility," the lawsuit said.

Thomas Dodge paid $132,250 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of female employees who claimed offensive touching, degrading and sexually explicit comments and pornographic images. According to the lawsuit the females reported the sexual harassment and unprofessional conduct to management but no corrective action was taken. Some of the female employees who complained were terminated and others were forced to resign. Those would be examples of retaliation and constructive discharge.

It is amazing that so many women could come forward and complain and management would do nothing to stop the harassment. Management in this case even went a step further and punished the women for complaining.

Eagle Wings Indusdries which is an automotive supplier pays $428,500 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of three female employees. One of the female employees Kimberly Bridgman alleged comments directed at her were lewd and included a request for oral sex in exchange for a transfer. This type of sexual harassment is referred to as quid quo pro and is latin for 'this for that". Another words, the requesting party was asking for something in return for something.

You can see how expensive the bad behavior of an employee can be. It is extremely important that employers take sexual harassment complaints seriously and train employees properly on what behavior is acceptable in the workplace. In this case Bridgman took disability leave because of the sexual harassment and when she returned to work the conduct continued forcing her to take leave again. This time when she tried to return to work, Eagle Wings refused to reinstate her unless she agreed to undergo a battery of psychological examinations. At this point she claimed to be constructively discharged and filed the lawsuit. Constructive discharge occurs when the employer sets forth conditions which if aren't met require the employee to stay off work.

A cashier and part-time cook at Bon Appetit alleged she was sexually harassed by her general manager Leslie Simmonds. She alleged the sexual harassment included being asked for sex, inappropriate comments and making her read a pornographic story he had written. The story was very detailed and very sexual. As a result of this behavior the female filed a sexual harassment complaint and settled her complaint for $22,500. The retaliation portion of her complaint arose after she rejected his sexual advances, and Simmonds retaliated by treating her poorly, and requested that she be transferred to his location.

She complained to Bon Appetit's district manager and provided a detailed account of the sexual harassment she had experienced. The district manager denied the harassment and stated that she had engaged in unacceptable behavior. Subsequently a raise she had been set to receive was revoked, and she was excluded from meetings. She resigned, believing that she had no choice and that her employer's treatment constituted a constructive discharge. It still amazes me that so many people in upper management take the approach of shooting the messenger instead of doing a proper investigation and resolving the problem. In this case Bon Appetit got off cheap.

Continue reading "Bon Appetit to pay $22,500 in Settlement of Charge of Sexual Harassment and Retaliation" »

The Maryland Classified Employees Association ("MCEA") union pays $80,000 to settle a retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Oppor­tunity Commission ("EEOC") 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.

According to the lawsuit MCEA denied a promotion to Handy and subjected her to discriminatory terms and conditions of employment because she filed a discrimin­ation 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.

“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.

Cannon & Wendt Electric Co. will pay $100,000 to settle a national origin discrimination lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Victor Cortez who claims he was subjected to racist statements based on his national origin and that he was the victim of retaliation because the company terminated him after he complained about the unlawful discrimination.

According to details in the lawsuit Cortez's immediate supervisor Mark Ghose made very crude and illegal comments to him. The comments included “I hate all Mexicans,” “they are worthless,” and “I hate Mexican music.” Ghose made it clear that he wanted to fire Cortez. Cortez complained to upper management and to the owner Albert Wendt, however nothing was done to stop the harassment and he was fired. This company is a repeat offender as far as discriminating against employee and it is nice to see the EEOC keep after this company. Hopefully, people will read about what is taking place and not do business with this company.

"This is a particularly troubling case because the EEOC sued this particular employer for religious discrimination a few years ago. After being sued, most employers take their EEO obligations under the law seriously. It is troubling to the EEOC to see a repeat offender.” said Janet Elizondo, EEOC attorney.

Golden State Mutual Life Insurance will pay $30,000 to settle a retaliation lawsuit. The retaliation lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of William Barringer after he was demoted in retaliation for reporting sexual harassment. According to the lawsuit, an employee who Barringer managed was sexually harassed by his supervisor, and this supervisor also supervised Barringer. Barringer reported the sexual harassment to the vice president and also told his supervisor that he was reporting his behavior.

In this case the Barringer stuck his own neck out to protect one of his employees and he suffered retaliation. It is good to see a good boss who goes to bat for his worker. I am very glad the EEOC was able to help Mr. Barringer and he was able to make the company pay for their handling of this situation. Good job Mr. Barringer.

“Employees should be confident that they can make their employers aware of violations of federal anti-discrimination laws without fear of reprisal,” said Lynette A. Barnes attorney of EEOC. “The anti-retaliation provisions of Title VII are indispensable to the attainment of a workplace free of discrimination.”

The University of Louisiana ("ULM"), will pay $450,000 to settle an age discrimination and retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Oppor­tunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of former professor and dean of the College of Business Administration, Dr. Van McGraw. According to the lawsuit McGraw alleges the university rejected him for employ­ment repeatedly because of his age, and because he had filed an earlier age discrimination lawsuit against the university.

The lawsuit alleges the University violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA"). McGraw had previously worked for the university for 37 years and retired in1989 as dean of the College of Business Administration. After retiring he was imme­diately rehired as a professor in the Department of Manage­ment and Marketing. ULM terminated McGraw in 1996 under a then-new board policy regarding the reemployment of retirees.

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.

The administrative assistance to former Mayor Gary Becker’s will receive $50,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit she filed. According to the discrimination complaint she worked in a hostile work environment because of the sexual harassing nature of the comments and acts of the Mayor. She also claimed retaliation because she was terminated for filing a complaint about the sexual harassment.

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.

Nicole Whitley agreed to settle her sexual harassment, gender discrimination and retaliation lawsui against the city for $170,000. According to the lawsuit Whitley was fired in retaliation for filing a sexual harassment and gender discrimination complaint while she was a police cadet at the state police academy. The problem for Whitley started when she was called into a room by a lieutenant and told that her nipples showed through her uniform during training and she was asked whether she was wearing a sports bra. The lieutenant went on to tell her to wear extra lawyers of clothing and a coat during future training.

Whitley complained to superiors about the conversation and need to wear extra clothing and felt that she was being singled out. Whitley injured herself and was placed on light duty. She was fired a few months later citing her probationary performance review as the reason. In that review she was cited for missing classes and failure to turn in a report. She believes this was a pretext for firing her because she complained about the comments. After being fired Whitley finished college and received a degree in criminal justice but has been unable to find employment.

This case shows the long term damage that can occur if you complain about discrimination. It is important to follow through and not let a termination of employment go unchallenged. In this case, she is getting a good settlement and this should help her find future employment.

RJB Properties, Inc. and Blackstone Consulting, Inc., have been sued for sexual harassment, retaliation and national origin. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Latino employees. According to the lawsuit, 14 employees who worked as janitors and supervisors were fired because of their national origin, sexual harassment and retaliation. The Hispanic employees also had to listen to derogatory names and comments while they were working.

Additional details of the lawsuit include one Hispanic supervisor who was fired because he would not follow his superiors orders to fire another Hispanic employee for no reason. An employee does not have to follow discriminatory orders from management. It was nice to see this supervisor stand up to management and not follow their allegedly illegal orders. The EEOC also alleges Hispanic male employees were subjected to sexual harassment and when they would not go along with the request for sex, were subjected to retaliation by being fired.

“Employers cannot apply one set of rules to Hispanic workers and another set of rules to non-Hispanic workers, which is what we found occurred here. said EEOC attorney Ann Henry

Continue reading "Chicago Based RJB Properties Sued For Sexual Harassment and Retaliation" »

Kane County Illinois will pay $75,000 to Erma Rodriquez who is a former corrections officer to settle her sexual harassment lawsuit. Rodriquez claims she was subjected to sexually suggestive remarks over the course of two years and she reported the harassment to her superiors. She also filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") and claims to have been the victim of retaliation for making the report. According to the lawsuit Rodriguez received a verbal reprimand after filing her claim with the EEOC.

The final straw for Rodriquez was when she found a phallic-shaped piece of insulation foam that had graphic markings on it. The item was left on her desk and caused her emotional distress. The lawsuit claims the day she found the item and reported it, she became the subject of an internal investigation which she claims was done in retaliation for making the report. It is typical in sexual harassment lawsuits to see the defendant make life difficult for plaintiffs once they come forward and file complaints. This is typical behavior and I am glad to see the defendants pay for what they did wrong.

Chicago bakery Gonnella Baking Co. agreed to pay $350,000 to settle a retaliation and national origin harassment lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Oppor­tunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of seven Mexican employees. According to allegations in the lawsuit Gonnella did nothing to stop the harassment of the employees. This type of behavior is not acceptable and illegal in Illinois.

The employees allege that their manager made hostile comments about them because they were Mexican. Once employees complained to management about the comments they were subjected to shifts that lasted over 12 hours and in some cases 19 hours. They were also told to not complain further about the discrimination or else face the consequences. This type of behavior is considered retaliation. In Chicago there are many companies that treat employees like this and hopefully more employees will come forward to assert their rights.

“The derogatory language and other harassment directed at the employees in this case are entirely inappropriate in the workplace,” said John Hendrickson, the EEOC’s regional attorney in Chicago.

Greenforest Community Baptist Church agrees to pay $53,000 to settle two pregnancy discrimination lawsuits. The lawsuits were filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Victoria Brown and Shuntal Prince. According to details in the lawsuit Greenforest violated federal law when it fired Prince and rescinded a job offer to Brown after learning they were pregnant. They company not only engaged in pregnancy discrimination but also retaliation.

In the case of Brown she already received an employment offer when she went for a follow-up meeting with the headmaster to discuss some final pre-employment matters before she was to begin her new job. During this meeting, Brown informed the headmaster that she was pregnant and the headmaster told her she would not be able to teach there because of her pregnancy. This is a clear violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

In the second case Prince was called into a meeting with the school’s director to discuss some concerns she had about Prince’s health. Although the context of the meeting seemed routine it was really a pretext for discussing Princes pregnancy. During the meeting, the director told Prince she heard rumors that Prince was pregnant. Prince confirmed that she was pregnant and the director fired her.

“Pregnant women have an equal right to participate in the work force,” said Robert Dawkins, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Atlanta District Office.

Continue reading "Baptist Church Settles Pregnancy Discrimination Lawsuit For $53,000" »

Kmart Corporation pays $120,000 to settle an age discrimination, constructive discharge and retaliation lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a 70-year-old pharmacist. According to details in the lawsuit, Kmart thought the pharmacist was too old and should retire. Kmart also said the pharmacist was greedy for wishing to work once she reached 70 years of age.

Kmart scheduled the pharmacist to work on Sunday even though they were aware she attended church and would not be able to work that day. This is a prime example of how coompanies try to set workers up for failure by asking them to do something they know they can't do in an attempt to come up with a reason to fire the worker. Kmart also threatened legal action against the pharmacist using a pretext on an unrelated matter to retaliate against her for her discrimination complaint. The pharmacist was forced to quit her position because of the harassment and this is referred to as constructive discharge.

“Instead of addressing this pharmacist’s legitimate complaints of age discrimination, Kmart made a bad situation worse by threatening her for complaining,” said EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru.

Continue reading "Kmart Settles Age Discrimination Lawsuit For $120,000" »

Alliance Rental Center will pay $21,500 to settle a religious discrimination lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a former worker, Tyler Templeton who was fired because he would not wear a red shirt on Friday to show his support for the military. According to the lawsuit Templeton who is a Jehovah's Witness, said it was against his religious beliefs and his observance of neutrality on issues of war to go along with wearing the red shirt.

Templeton informed his supervisors about his religious beliefs and his observance of neutrality on issues of war, including military efforts, but was reprimanded for not complying with the Friday dress code. It would not have taken much for the company to respect the religious beliefs of Templeton and tell him it was okay not to wear the red shirt. The company is in business to make money not to tell people what they should support. Templeton was fired shortly after he refused to wear the red shirt. Firing him is regarded as retaliation.

“This is a positive outcome for all parties involved, and it is our hope that the company will be successful going forward as a result of the changes called for in this settlement agreement,” said EEOC Trial Attorney Meaghan Shepard.

The Boeing Company will pay $380,000 to settle two lawsuits involving gender discrimination and retaliation. The lawsuits were filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of two female engineers. In the first lawsuit Antonia Castron complained of gender discrimination based on sexist remarks which resulted in a hostile work environment. After she complained to management, she was moved to a new location and two months later she found herself without a job. The lawsuit filed by the EEOC alleges Boeing engaged in retaliation for terminating Castron.

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.

Four former workers of supermarket giant PriceRite filed a lawsuit in federal court claiming they were the victims of sexual harassment. Details of the lawsuit indicate that the store manager was allegedly the one sexually harassing the women. the women include Charlene DeAngelo, Patricia Frasca, Kai Fasset and Rebecca Eastman. They not only allege they were the victims of sexual harassment but also other female customers.
According to allegations in the lawsuit the four women claim Potter attempted to have sexual intercourse with them. He also made nasty comments to them and would often times stare at the breasts and buttocks of female customers.

All of the women complainted to PriceRite's human resources manager but nothing was done to stop the sexual harassment. The women all claims they were subjected to retaliation for reporting the sexual harassment. In an interesting claim, Potter is alleged to have used surveillance cameras to focus on women who were shopping in the store. After we would spot a woman he liked he would brag about what he intended to do with the women.

“One customer found a note on her car, soliciting her to engage in some sort of conduct,” the lawsuit claims.

A lawsuit against Rend Lake College was dismissed by a federal judge because the plaintiff Salah Shakir was not able to provide evidence of unlawful activity by the Illinois community college. Shakir claimed discrimination based on national origin by an administrator who retaliated against Shakir because of his Muslim religion and Iraqi roots. The allegation included trying to ensure he would not be able to head the school.

In order to prevail in a lawsuit alleging nation origin discrimination, one would have to prove that but for the fact of the country of origin, the person would have either gotten a promotion, not been fired, or received a raise. If there are other non-discriminatory reasons why the negative job action or lack of positive job action took place, then the plaintiff will not be able to prove the case and it will most likely be dismissed.

“The board constantly strives to ensure that Rend Lake College is welcome to both employees and students of all backgrounds and cultures,” said the school’s attorney, Julie Bruch.

Continue reading "National Origin Discrimination Lawsuit Against Rend Lake College Dismissed" »

Four former employees of PriceRite supermarket filed a sexual harassment lawsuit alleging store manager David Potter sexually harassed them. Among the allegations in the lawsuit are claims Potter would show his penis, rub and manipulate his groin and grab his penis asking if the women wanted to touch it. If these allegations can be proven, the company will have some serious liability.

Charlene DeAngelo, Patricia Frasca, and Rebecca Eastman, claim they were fired soon after complaining to Potter's superiors. This is considered retaliation because they were allegedly fired after complainint about a protected activity. The fourth woman, Kai Fasset, quit the day after making an off-duty visit to the store with her boyfriend. The details of the alleged encounter are bizarre. Apparently Potter greeted the couple when they entered to shop and said to the boyfriend, that he should be congratulated for having sexual intercourse with Fasset. This should be an interesting case and this blog will keep readers posted on the outcome.

"Potter would routinely declare that he was interested in a quick sexual relationship with her (DeAngelo) and/or other employees," the suit states.

Cathy Monaghan is suing the El Dorado County Water Agency alleging her boss sexually harassed her, and that the affair eventually spiraled into threesomes with her husband. This is a very unique sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit. According to the lawsuit, William T. Hetland, her boss demanded sexual favors from Monaghan and if she refused she would be fired. Monaghan claims that Hetland that she gave in to the request for sex in part because he would get her drunk. At some point she began feeling guilty about the affair and told her husband, at which point the three of them participated in 'threesomes.

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.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ("Seventh Circuit") has breathed some life into Paul Turner. Turner worked as a waiter for The Saloon, Ltd. ("The Saloon"), a Chicago steak-house. While working as a waiter her claims to have been the victim of several forms of employment discrimination including sexual harassment, retaliation, and violation of the Americans with Disabilites Act ("ADA"). According to the lawsuit Turner had a sexual relationship with his supervisor and claims that he ended it and she began to sexually harass him. Turner complained to restaurant management about the sexual harassment and filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC").

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.

CEO Gregory Moore of Smithfield's Chicken 'n Bar-B-Q chain agreed to pay $449,200 plus $375,780 in attorney fees to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit. This may seem like large amount of money but Moore was ordered to pay $1.15 million to Jason Hallaman after a two-week jury trial. As is common in trials, many times the parties will agree to settle for a lessor amount in return for not appealing the decision. If the decision is appealed, it could take years for the person to get their money and there is always a chance the jury decision will be overturned or the award amount lowered.

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.

Penny Jackson the former Bauxite school janitor filed a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit against her former employer. In the lawsuit Jackson claims that for a period of seven months she was subjected to repeated sexual harassment from the maintenance supervisor Sammy Roberson. According to court documents Jackson was subjected to propositions for sex and sexually explicit comments. Jackson alleges she complained about the sexual harassment and was then the subject of retaliation. Prior to filing her lawsuit Jackson filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") who investigated and issued a right to sue letter.

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,”

Sandra Brewer filed a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit against her former employer the College of the Mainland. According to the lawsuit Brewer was terminated from the college because she complained about sexual harassment which would constitute her retaliation claim. The issues for Brewer started back in 2006 when she alleges that for a period of two years Al Bass her boss and a college associate vice presidnet began to sexually harass her.

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.

Continue reading "College of the Mainland Sued For Sexual Harassment" »

United Companies will pay $498,000 to settle a gender discrimination and retaliation lawsuit which was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a female worker who court documents did not name. According to details in the lawsuit the woman has been working for the company since 1998 and held a variety of jobs before the company assigned her to work as a quality control technician. According to documents in the lawsuit once in that position the gender discrimination against her became overt and interfered with her ability to work.

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.

Continue reading "United Companies Pays $498,000 To Settle Gender Discrimination and Retaliation Lawsuit" »

Decatur Chief Financial Officer Gail Busbey filed a sexual harassment against the city alleging Mayor Don Stanford made inappropriate comments and unwanted physical contact with her. Busbey is also alleging retaliation because she alleges Stanford attempted to terminate her employment after she filed a complaint about Stanford with the director of personnel Ken Smith.

Busbey settled the sexual harassment lawsuit for $93,000 and agreed to retire as part of the settlement. However, a member of the city council made statements about Busbey and now she is suing seeking over one million in damages for false light and breach of the agreement. In sexual harassment cases there is usually a confidentiality clause and also a clause about not speaking negatively about either party. You can see the problems that occur when one party talks about the other party.

“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.

Continue reading "Chief Financial Officer Gail Busbey Settles Sexual Harassment Lawsuit For $93,000" »

A young 17 year old female farm worker filed a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit against her employer Giumarra Vineyards Corp. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the young victim claiming a non-management worker made daily unwanted sexual advances to the alleged victim. According to the lawsuit, another employer made management aware of what was going on and management failed to stop it. The sexual harassment continued until the young woman and three others complainted directly to management but were terminated 24 hours later.

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 following federal case, 3:07-CV-410-H, illustrates how difficult it can be to prevail in a case of sexual harassment or constructive discharge. Shironda McCloud filed a claim against the United States Postal Service ("USPS") alleging sexual harassment and constructive discharge. Constructive discharge occurs when an employee quits their job but claims they had to quit because the working conditions were so unbearable that a reasonable person would not continue to work in those conditions. Constructive discharge differs from retaliation in that, the employee quits in a constructive discharge case whereas an employee is fired in a retaliation case--or the employee may be the subject of some other negative job action.

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.

Continue reading "United States Post Offices Has Sexual Harassment Lawsuit Dismissed" »

UPS Freight agreed to pay $46,000 to settle a religious discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a Rastafarian. This is a very unique set of circumstances because the religion is one not considered mainstream. According to the lawsuit UPS refused to accommodate the Rastafarian religious beliefs of Nieland Bynoe. As long as the religious beliefs are sincere and a reasonable accomodation is available, the company must make the accomodation or risk liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. An example of a reasonable accomodation is if a religion does not allow its members to work on a certain day, say Sunday and giving Sunday off to an employee did not create a hardship for the employer, the employer must give the worker Sunday off.

In this case instead of making the reasonable accomondation UPS fired him. During new hire orientation as a driver for UPS management told Bynoe he had to shave his beard and cut his hair in accordance with the company’s grooming policy. Bynoe replied that his religious beliefs prohibit him from cutting his hair or shaving his beard. Bynoe again advised the human resources manager about his religious beliefs and asked for a reasonable accommodation on the following day but UPS fired him. This is also a form of retaliation because Bynoe asked not to be discriminated against and he was fired.

“Our freedom to practice our religious beliefs is a fundamental right in this country,” said Acting Regional Attorney Debra Lawrence of the EEOC

Peter's Diner and its owner Angelo Giannkaris will pay a total of $27,500 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit with waitress Lynnann Zuest. It is alleged that Giannkaris sexually harassed Zuest and later fired her in retaliation for reporting it. According to the complaint Zuest was fired after approaching a fellow waitress and reporting that Giannkaris had inappropriately touched her by placing his hands on her hips.

Giannkaris disputed that he fired Zuest for reporting sexual harassment and instead said she was terminated for poor job performance. Giannkaris said Zuest dropped many trays and plates in support of his reason for her dismissal. However during further investigation there was evidence to support Zuest’s allegations and undermine the reasons Giannkaris gave for the firing. Also Peter’s had no policy in place regarding sexual harassment or the filing of workplace harassment complaints. Companies must have sexual harassment and discrimination policies in place so workers no where to go when they encounter workplace discrimination and harassment.

Richard Knight a male hotel worker for the Columbia Sussex Corporation, settled his gender discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed on his behalf by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). According to the lawsuit, Knight who was a manager claimed that Columbia Sussex fired him from its Sheraton Hotel because he was a male, and because he complained that a female co-worker was not disciplined for the same purported infraction--which is retaliation.

Details in the lawsuit claim the companies general manager demanded that Knight go into his office without the presence of a human resource representative, but did not force Knight’s female co-worker to proceed without a representative-when they both had the same infractions. When Knight asked the general manager whether he was granting privileges to the female manager that he would not grant to Knight, the general manager replied that he could do whatever he wanted and then he immediately terminated Knight. For the exact same infraction the female manager was not disciplined. As part of the settlement Knight will be returned to his position and receive back pay.

Knight commented on the settlement, “I am very grateful that the EEOC brought this case on my behalf. I love the hotel industry. My main goal was always to get my job back. I am excited to get back to work with Columbia Sussex in my chosen field.”

Continue reading "Male Hotel Worker Settles Gender Discrimination and Retaliation Lawsuit" »

Anthony Kerr, a Muslim settled his retaliation and religious discrimination lawsuit against New Community Corporation for $25,000. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Kerr. According to detail of the lawsuit, New Community Corporation would not grant Kerr a reasonable accommodation when he requested that he be excused from a requirement that employees donate money to a Catholic school. His employer requested the donations because they are part of a Catholic parish. However Kerr's religious beliefs as a Muslim are different than the school’s religious mission which is based on the Catholic religion.

Based on court documents after Kerr refused to give a donation and complained that the demand for a donation conflicted with his religious beliefs, New Community Corporation removed him from its work schedule, which is retaliation. Retaliation occurs when you complain of discriminatory conduct and you receive negative treatment as a result of the complaint. Kerr ultimately filed a complaint with the EEOC and the corporation retaliated against him when he did file with the EEOC by firing him and then filing an improper complaint about him with his full-time employer alleging that he had engaged in misconduct at New Community Corporation.

“The EEOC will vigorously enforce the law to end such discriminatory practices. An employer, even one that engages in charitable work, cannot subject an employee to religious discrimination or retaliation.” said EEOC Attorney Louis Graziano

Continue reading "Retaliation and Religious Discrimination Lawsuit Settled For $25,000" »

Gail Wilcox who is the former Assistant County Administrator and she agreed to settle her sexual harassment lawsuit with her former employer for $180,000. The county claims that defending the county by going to trial would potentially cost more than $1 million. To date, the county has spent $337,000 on the case. That seems to be a very high amount and I wonder what the initial settlement demand was for.

Wilcox filed her lawsuit against county supervisors and former boss, David Edge, claiming she was a victim of sexual harassment, retaliation, a hostile work environment and breach of contract. Wilcox and Edge were placed on paid administrative leave pending an investigation. At the end of the investigation Edge was fired and the county hired an out-of-town attorney to investigate Wilcox. Following that investigation, the board fired Wilcox a mistake that cost over $500,000 when you include the attorney fees and settlement amount.

Margaret Gibson settled her pregnancy discrimination lawsuit with U.S. Security Associates for $79,880. The lawsuit was filed on Gibson's behalf by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), which is charged with protecting the rights of employee who are the victims of discrimination in the workplace. According to court documents U.S. Security Associates subjected Gibson who was a security guard to pregnancy discrimination and then fired her in retaliation for complaining about the discrimination. In a remarkable series of events, U.S. Security Associates also fired her husband as part of the retaliation.

Details of the discrimination and civil rights violations were that Gibson was subjected to unwarranted discipline, sexist comments and mistreatment after she told her manager about the pregnancy. Allegedly, Gibson’s manager said a pregnant woman should be at home, not at work, and that Gibson’s focus should be on her children. These types of comments are from the dark ages and have place in the modern work place. In another shocking comment the manager also complained about Gibson’s pregnant appearance in the guard uniform.

Most cases of retaliation are proved with circumstantial evidence. In this case Gibson’s was fired the same day she turned in her paperwork for maternity leave. That is awful coincidental to be a coincidence. According to court documents U.S. Security Associates terminated her husband when he failed to stop his wife from filing a discrimination charge with the EEOC.

“The EEOC is dedicated to ensuring that employers treat all employees equally, regardless of gender, pregnancy status or association,” said Robert Dawkins, regional attorney for the Atlanta District Office.

The city of San Leandro settled 4 for their 7 sexual harassment disputes for $405,000. According to the settlement documents three former San Leandro police officers and a department clerk will receive a total of $405,000. Former Officers Taiwo Pena-Hornung, Christina Tiletile and Kamilah Jackson, and records clerk Amanda Kerr sued the city claiming they were sexually harassed, discriminated against for their gender and national origin, and retaliation.

The trouble isn't over for the city as three female officers still employed also have active lawsuits and their cases are set for trial in October. According to court documents the settlement breaks down as follows. Tiletile was awarded $295,000. Pena-Hornung $50,000, Kerr $35,000 and Jackson $25,000. Sgt. J. DeWayne Stancill was accused of sexual harassment and of creating a hostile work environment in the cases.

Hotel magnate Kenneth Seaton is being sued for sexual harassment by two employees who seek millions of dollars in compensation. In a related bit of news, Seaton faces criminal charges over the alleged sexual battery of five women last fall at his business. The lawsuit was filed by two housekeepers, Samantha Fiedorowicz and Candice Michelle. According to allegations in the lawsuit, both women were required to attend an afternoon meeting in which Seaton was intoxicated and tried to kiss and grope the women including touching their buttocks and breasts.

The lawsuit also alleges unwelcome sexually offensive remarks and conduct, including lewd and inappropriate comments, requests for sex and fondling. Both women claim retaliation as they were terminated when they refused and resisted Seatons sexual harassment and offers for sex. The lawsuit seeks over $ 2 million in damages. Many times sexual harassment claims also involve claims of retaliation as the harassor will discipline or fire the employees for not cooperating with the request for sex.

"You would be surprised what Viagra can do for an old man," the lawsuit, filed in Sevier County Circuit Court, quotes Seaton as telling the two plaintiffs in the action. "If you cooperate," the quote goes on, "you won't need a husband."

Eagle Wings Industries, Inc. pays $428,500 to a class of female employees to settle their sexual harassment and Americans With Disabilities Act ("ADA") lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the female workers. According to the lawsuit the female employees were subjected to sexual harassment and retaliation for complaining about the sexual harassment. One female was also discriminated against by the company when it required her to undergo an unlawful medical examination, a clear violation of the ADA.

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

Continue reading "Eagle Wings Industries Pays $428,500 To Settle Sexual Harassment Lawsuit" »

Hightstown adult novelties company must pay $500,000 to Doreen Longa a former employee who was fired after complaining of sexual harassment. According to the lawsuit the adult company did not investigate the sexual harassment charges Longa lodged against a co-worker, and Longo was terminated when she complained that she was being retaliated against.

Longo filed a lawsuit based on sexual harassment, retaliation and a hostile work environment after being terminated. In the lawsuit Longo said her bosses ignored her repeated complaints of sexual harassment by a a co-worker and that he even threatened her with violence. Longo filed a formal complaint with managment and was immediately disciplined for poor work performance. Longa was terminated two months later after complaining about the retaliation that was taking place at work. Longa claims her boss told her the reason for the termination was her complaints about sexual harassment.

"The president of the company yelled and screamed at her and disciplined her for the first time in the four years she’d worked there. He accused her of saying bad things about the company.”

Carol Melnick filed a lawsuit against the Monmouth County board in 2005 claiming discrimination based on gender, retaliation, hostile work environment and sexual harassment. The case was settled in 2007 for $470,000 but the details were sealed. In the latest development in the case the New Jersey's Supreme Court ruled the terms should be made public and thus the details were released.

Melnick remains employed by the county despite her award on the sexual harassment lawsuit. When you get a settlement for almost half a million dollars from a public entity, there must be good facts supporting the allegations. Both parties should keep in mind that when a settlement is reached involving a pubilc entity, the terms of the settlement will probably come out and not remain private. Unlike a private company, the public has a right to know how their money is being spent.

Former Metro Schools Payroll Coordinator Vicky Crawford was awarded about $1.5 million on her claims she was wrongfully terminated when she cooperated in a sexual harassment investigation of a school official. This is also known as retaliation. Crawford, who had over 30 years service with the school disctrict claimed she was fired because she cooperated in the investigation. Her lawsuit was initially dismissed by a federal judge and upheld on appeal. Last January, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Crawford v. Metro Schools, that Crawford could sue claiming retaliation even though she was not the one who brought the original sexual harassment claims. This was a landmark case and should help employees who have been fired for cooperating with sexual harassment investigations.

The problems for Crawford began when there was an investigation into sexual harassment claims against Employee Relations Director Gene Hughes. Crawford told investigators Hughes would ask to see her breasts, grab his crotch saying, "You know what's up," and on one occasion pulled her head to his crotch. Human resources officer Veronica Frazier assured Crawford she would be protected from retaliation if she came forward and helped with the investigation. In the end no action was taken against Hughes however on the same day Frazier turned in her report on the allegations, she also sent a letter to Metro Nashville's internal audit department informing them of concerns with the operation of Crawford's payroll department. Crawford was then fired.

"It's been a long, long fight. It's been very hard all these years, and we're very happy with the verdict," said Ann Steiner, Crawford's attorney.

Eightenn former prison guards settled a sexual harassment lawsuit for $2.5 Million. The female prison guards allege they were subjected to sexually demeaning remarks in front of inmates which violated security and put their lives at risk. One female guard alleged a male guard suggested an inmate should have sex with her in an area of the prison not covered by security cameras. Other allegations are that the male guards would use the walkie-talkie system in a jamming fashion to prevent the female guards from asking for help.

It was further alleged that high ups in the prison system were trying to recruit the prison guards as prostitutes. This type of behavior by public officials is outragous and cannot be tolerated. In cases like this the females must come forward and fight for their rights. Employment cases involving sexual harassment and retaliation can be difficult to prove and it helps to have an experienced attorney involved early in the process.

“We had names and dates and places. Some women were asked to join in prostitution rings that were run by lieutenants, and that was substantiated because [one] lieutenant’s partner was arrested for running a prostitution ring,” by Hartford police, attorney Ponvert said.

Three Hispanic Emergency Medical Services ("EMS") females settle their sexual harassment lawsuit with West New York for $142,000. In a typical move, the town denies any wrongdoing as part of the settlement. In the present economic environment $142,000 is a good deal of money and I think the settlement speaks volumes about what really happened. Documents filed in court claim the five women allege their supervisor, Edward Monti, the former director of the ambulance service, sexually harassed them. They claim the sexual harassment consisted of sexual gestures, words, conduct, and behavior.

The females also claim they reported the conduct of Monti and the town took no action. Instead of an investigation and the sexual harassment to cease, the women claim Monti reduced their work hours in retaliation for complaining about his behavior. Monti is no longer in the position he once held and is instead the town's director of school crossing guards. So lets recap. The town pays $142,000 claiming it would cost more money to continue the litigation, while denying any liability and moving Monti to a new position where he supervises school crossing guards. Sounds like the town realized it had a problem and is quickly trying to end the problem.

"It ultimately comes down to dollars," said town attorney Daniel Horgan, who said by the time the case were to have made it to discovery, the town would have spent more than the cost to settle."

Continue reading "EMS Workers Settle Sexual Harassment Lawsuit For $142,000" »

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."

Bill Heard Chevrolet Corp. will pay $110,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit. According to court documents the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") alleged management and workers made crude remarks about women's bodies, grabbed at one female employees breasts, persistently solicited females for sexual favors and sexually assaulted at least one female employee. When the women cmplained to management in an effort to stop the sexual harassment, the females were either demoted, disciplined or fired--all forms of retaliation.

The lawsuit also alleges that management told some female employees that women should not be in the auto business. This type of behavior is not acceptable and the females stood up for themselves and made management pay. It is very important to document behavior like this and to contact an employment attorney who can file a complaint on your behalf with either the EEOC or in Illinois, the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR"). The IDHR will cross-file with the EEOC but by law only one agency will take the lead in investigating the complaint.

“The women in this case sought to earn a living selling cars and rightfully expected to do so while being treated with dignity and respect,” said Anna Park, regional attorney for the EEOC.”

Continue reading "Chevrolet Car Dealer Settles Sexual Harassment Lawsuit With EEOC For $110,000" »

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") settled a retaliation lawsuit with Rock Concrete Construc­tion Corporation for $31,000. In addition Rock Concrete Construction will also provide workers with discrimination training and allow employees access to a company hotline for reporting work place discrimination. The basis of the lawsuit was the company stopped providing work to Eric Bufkin who filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC.

Details of the lawsuit include Eric Bufkin’s filing a charge of discrimination against a company that Rock Concrete Construction did a good deal of work with. When Rock Concrete Construction found out, they asked Bufkin to drop his charge and told him that if he did not it would impact him in a negative way. Bufkin refused to drop the charge of discrimination he filed with the EEOC and Rock Concrete stopping providing work for him. What Rock Concrete Construction engage in was retaliation. Retaliation occurs when a company threatens you with a negative job action if you file a charge of discrimination or if you won't submit to their demands and drop a charge of discrimination.

“Employers are simply not entitled to punish employees for complaining about discrim­ination,” said Laurie A. Young, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Indianapolis District Office.

Continue reading "EEOC Settles Retaliation Lawsuit With Rock Concrete Construction For $31,000" »

The city of Atherton will pay $230,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by a former police officer. According to court documents former Atherton police Officer Pilar Ortiz-Buckley alleged Public Works Supervisor Troy Henderson of making salacious remarks and grabbing her in the police break room. Ortiz-Buckley suffered back injuries during the alleged incident, which prevented her from wearing her police duty belt and made it impossible for her to do her job.

After Ortiz-Buckley filed an internal complaint with the town, administrators did almost nothing to discipline Henderson and in fact blamed the policewoman for the incident. This is a form or retaliation and happens very often in cases like this. Ortiz-Buckley later pressed charges and received a restraining order against Henderson. In the restraining order Ortiz-Buckley claimed Henderson had done this many times and was in fact a serial sexual harassor. Henderson denies all of the allegations.

"This is a significant amount of money, but litigation costs are very high," City Attorney Wynne Furth said. "It does not mean that the town agrees with Ms. Ortiz's claim. ... Atherton is a small town with a small budget."

Continue reading "City Pays $230,000 To Settle Sexual Harassment Case" »

Five former employees of Bell Road Kia and Bell Road Automall will receive $500,000 to settle their sexual harassment, hostile work environment and retaliation lawsuit against the car dealership. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of the former employees and according to the lawsuit the hostile work environment included such disgusting comments as the females being called whores and cunts. The allegations in the lawsuit also say there was widespead use of computers to view pornography and one manager even masterbated while watching pornography and sitting behind a female employee.

According to the lawsuit an openly hostile work environment existed and the dealerships failed to take appropriate corrective action against the known harassers and instead retaliated against female employees who reported the sexual harassment. As a result of complaining to management about sexual harassment all five employees were demoted, terminated, or constructively discharged. This is referred to as retaliation and it violates federal law under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Former employee Julie Blakley said, “We were repeatedly subjected to degrading harassment and the managers made it known to us that they did not take our complaints seriously. Our exposure to abuse was prolonged by the fact that employees did not receive adequate training on preventing sexual harassment or on the process for filing complaints.”

Continue reading "Car Dealer Settles Sexual Harassment Lawsuit For $500,000" »

Schiemer Farms agreed to pay $14,500 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation alwsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Theresa Arias and Rebecca Jones. The two women alleged in their lawsuit that management at the farm permitted their sexual harassment by Mark Henry an employee, and then engaged in retaliation when they complained.

According to the sexual harassment lawsuit Henry made vulgar remarks and talked about his sex life including very vivid and graphic details. Henry is also alleged to have rubbed his groin against one of the women. The women were originally seeking over $100,000 each in damages but the amount was lowered once the case was filed and it looked like it would come down to a he said, she said situation. In cases like this where there may not be many witnesses and it is one persons word against another, the settlement amounts are usually lower.

“I feel like I’ve been dragged through the mud,” Farm owner Schiemer said.

Thomas Dodge Subaru will pay $132,250 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit involving two female employees. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") filed the lawsuit on behalf of the two former employees who allege that Thomas Dodge Subaru subjected them to pornography, offensive touching, degrading behavior and sexually explicit comments.

According to the lawsuit the two female employees were forced to resign which cost them their only source of income. The severity of the sexual harassment was the cause of their resignation. Additionally the lawsuit claims another woman was retaliated against by being fired after complaining about the sexual harassment. The company failed to take appropriate action to stop the sexual harassment and engaged in retaliation.

"No employer should allow such degrading and shameful conditions for women in the workplace," said Spencer H. Lewis, Jr., district director of the EEOC's New York District Office.

Continue reading "Thomas Dodge Subaru Pays $132,500 To Settle Sexual Harassment Lawsuit" »

Jessica Shell a Monroe County nurse is suing her former employer, Sweetwater Hospital for $1 million after she was allegedly sexually harrassed. Shell worked at Sweetwater Hospital in 2007 and according to her lawsuit more than one male co-worker made sexual advances and comments toward her. She is also alleging the CEO of the Sweetwater Hospital Association Scott Bowman sexually harassed her.

Shell alleges she complained of the sexual harassment to the hospital but they failed to stop the sexual harrassment. Shell also alleges she was fired after reporting the accusations which is retaliation. This case is shaping up to be a very explosive case with allegations involving the CEO. I believe that due to the current job market, many executives believe they can behave in any fashion they choose and the employee has to take it or leave.

Pat Gansen the 57 year-old Mason City animal control officer settled her age discrimination lawsuit against the city for $64,000. The lawsuit alleged the city allowed discrimination based on gender and age. Gansen also accused the city managers of retaliation when she complained about discrimination when they didn't promote her.

Age and gender discrimination are illegal and a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. As part of the settlement both parties agreed there is not an admission of liability on the part of the city. Even though the city asked for this language in the agreement as do most defendants, the fact that they paid $64,000 speaks for itself. As the job market gets tighter and more employees are getting squeezed by their employers, many different types of discrimination are coming to the surface. It is important to discuss employment issues with an attorney as soon as possible to protect your rights.

Tepanyaki a Japanese restaurant will pay $30,000 to settle a pregnancy discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Alison Woodbury. According to the lawsuit Tepanyaki discriminated against Woodbury by firing her because she was pregnant. According to court records, Woodbury was hired as a server and during her initial training Tepanyaki learned she was pregnant and terminated her, which is retaliation.

It is illegal under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to discrimination against a pregnant person. Many times companies will try to make up reasons to fire a worker once she becomes pregnant and it is important for the worker to protect her rights.

"Under federal law, employers must permit pregnant employees to work as long as they are able to perform their jobs," said EEOC Regional Attorney Mary Jo O'Neill. "All workers, including pregnant employees, deserve fairness in the workplace. Women should not lose employment opportunities because of pregnancy."

A national movie theater chain,Regal Entertainment Group, will pay $175,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") which alleged the company subjected a male employee to sexual harassment by a female co-worker. The lawsuit also alleged the company engaged in retaliation when he complained about the sexual harassment. The EEOC also alleged that as a result of the conduct a hostile work environment existed.

In its lawsuit it was alleged a female co-worker repeatedly grabbed a male workers crotch. The male employee asked the female to stop and when she would not he reported the sexual harassment to his direct supervisor. The direct supervisor then notified the general manager, and she failed to take action and the sexual harassment continued. Additionally the general manager retaliated against the male employee and two other supervisory employees who witnessed the sexual harassment. The retaliation took the form of unfair performance evaluations which were lower than they should have been, unwarranted discipline, and a level of scrutiny of daily job performance that was not warranted.

Continue reading "More Than Popcorn At This Movie Theatre" »

Tracy Barker claimed she was raped in 2005 while working in Iraq for KBR inc. a former Halliburton Co. subsidiary. Barker claimed a former state department employee worked for KBR in Basra and sexual assaulted her, resulting in her rape. Barker was housed in mostly male barracks and consistently subjected to physical threats of sexual abuse and sexually explicit comments. Barker made a claim of sexual harassment against KBR inc. and the rapist personally.

Barker alleged other employees along with her complained to the companies but they did nothing and instead engaged in retaliation. She was awarded nearly $3 million by an arbitrator to settle her case. A federal judge in Houston had dismissed Barker's lawsuit in January 2008, because when she signed her employment contract she agreed that any dispute would be settled by arbitration. Looks like even with arbitration the company wasn't able to weasel their way out of paying a fair amount and giving Barker the justice she deserves.

"It took me a long time to get here. I'm happy about the award," Barker, 38, who lives in Yuma, Arizona.

Kristi Mitchell and Veronica Cobb both worders for State Farm insurance agent Obie Sorrell filed a lawsuit against him and the parent company alleging sexual harassment. The two women also are claiming a hostile work environment. Mitchell is the office office manager with over 7 years with the company while Cobb was hired as a customer service manager in May. State Farm in headquartered in Bloomington Illinois. With offices in Peoria and Chicago I see many cases like this were the boss creates a hostile work environment and the corporate office only cases about how it may affect them.

According to the lawsuit Sorrell repeatedly made vile comments to both women and called Cobb a "prostitute" and a "whore". Allegedly he said she was sleeping with policyholders. The lawsuit alleges that Sorrell would put his hands on both women even though they asked him to stop. Mitchell and Cobb complained to two State Farm officials, about Sorrell's alleged behavior, but nothing was done and the sexual harassment continued. The two women claim at one point State Farm executives apologized to them but were only interested in if the women were going to file a lawsuit.

When Cobb asked Sorrell not to call her a prostitute, according to the complaint, Sorrell replied, "This is my shop. My name is on the sign and if you don't like it you can get out."

Comments like that are a form of retaliation in Illinois. If a boss or management threatens a negative job action because you are trying to complain about sexual harassment or otherwise stop the sexual harassment you can file a claim with the Illinois Department of Human Rights.

In a recent case, Seybert v. International Group Inc, email was used by the defense to show that the plaintiff in a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit would not have been as offended by the conduct of the defendant as she claims. The jury said, plaintiff Susan Seybert was not sexually harassed by her supervisor, Brett Marchand, and there was no retaliation aginst Seybert once she complained to management.

What happend in this case is the defense utilized emails of a sexual nature that Seybert sent to other individuals which showed things of a sexual nature did not offend her. According to the lawsuit, the emails used sexual words, metaphors, puns and other innuendo to amuse, entertain and convey various humorous messages. In lawsuits involving sexual harassment a plaintiff must satisfy both an objective and a subjective test when alleging a hostile work environment. It is very important to utilize your company email for business only and to be aware that the company can get into your computer and retreive even deleted emails.

At trial the defense used a e-mail which showed a photo of a naked man in a Santa hat, lying on his belly, with a caption that told the recipient to turn him over to get at the "present."

Continue reading "Your Email History May Hurt Your Sexual Harassment Case" »

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") and legendary restaurant Tavern on the Green settled a sexual harassment lawsuit for $2.2 million. According to the lawsuit there were claims of sexual harassment, a hostile work environment and retaliation. The alleged sexual harassment included groping female staff members, demands for sex and sexual favors and the regular use of graphic sexual comments.

As is typical in these types of settlements the Tavern on the Green denied any wrongdoing as part of the settlement. The managers accused of engaging in severe and pervasive sexual harassment, and retaliation are not longer working for the restaurant. Most of the sexual harassment came from one long-time manager who has since left the restaurant. You can see how expensive the conduct of one manager can be to a business.

A national movie theater chain, Regal Entertainment Group agreed to pay $175,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit. The lawsuit was brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of a male worker who was being sexually harassed by a female co-worker. According to the lawsuit the company subjected a male employee to sexual harassment by a female co-worker and then retaliated against him for complaining about the unlawful conduct – along with two supervisors who tried to help.

According to the lawsuit a female co-worker who repeatedly grabbed his crotch. The male reported this conduct to his direct supervisor who complained to the theater’s then-general manager, but she failed to take adequate steps to stop or prevent the harassment. Instead, the general manager engaged in retaliation against the harassed employee and two other supervisory employees (male and female), who are part of the EEOC’s lawsuit. In Illinois retaliation includesd discipline, lower performance evaluations or other adverse job actions that are not warrented.

Lisa Drozdowski claimed that she had to wear adult diapers at her job at Danella Construction Corp. because it would not provide portable toilets and recently she was awarded $150,000 in a gender-discrimination lawsuit brought on her behalf by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). The men at the construction sites would just go to the bathroom in holes but Drozdowski had to walk a great distance to use a restroom. When Drozdowski complainted to management she suffered retaliation when the company stopped giving her work.

Four other female employees of Danella Construction Corp., also claimed that they were discriminated against because of gender, split an additional $50,000. According to the complaint other female flaggers who were present would shield each other from passing cars and co-workers with blankets while they went to the bathroom on the side of the road. The additional problem facing Drozdowski was that she was the only woman on a job and could not go to the bathroom and ended up urinating on herself. Rather than continue to urinate on herself she started to wear adult diapers to work each day.

"It was humiliating, but I needed the job." said Drozdowsky.

Drozdowsky is a single mother with three children.

Continue reading "Female Construction Worker Gets $150,000 For Being Forced To Wear Diapers" »

Tim Dahle Nissan settled a lawsuit for sexual harassment and retaliation by paying $455,000 and other substantial remedial relief. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC)" on behalf of five female employees who allegedly were subjected to unwelcome sexual comments and conduct. According to the lawsuit some of the conduct included many requests for sexual favors and sexually explicit language. According to the women many of the salesmen and sales managers took part in the sexual harassment over a period of several years.

An additional charge in the complaint was that Tim Dahle Nissan engaged in retaliation against one woman by firing her because she complained about the sexual harassment. In Illinois as in other states it is a violation of state law and federal law to fire an employee or take other adverse employment action if the employee complains about sexual harassment. Many times an employer doesn't want to deal with a complaint and finds it easier to fire the employee.

“Sexual harassment is always unacceptable, and it is especially disturbing when the harassers are mistreating a teenager in the workplace, as was the case here,” said EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru. “The EEOC takes its mission to eradicate this misconduct very seriously.”

Continue reading "Nissan Car Dealership Pays $455,000 To Settle Sexual Harassment and Retaliation Lawsuit" »

Kathy Rogers and Lisa Theberge who are two female firefighters filed a lawsuit against Westbrook's fire department, mayor and city administrator, claiming they failed to address sexual harassment that was documented in complaints to the Maine Human Rights Commission ("MHRC"). The MHRC is similar to the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") and is where I file most of my sexual harassment complaints. Both women are on paid administrative leave and are alleging obscene sexual harassment and discriminatory behavior in their lawsuit.

According to the allegations in the lawsuit several male firefighters, including the deputy chief, lieutenants and captains, engaged in incidents ranging from masturbation and pornography at the station to a sexual affair and sex at a fire department gathering. In one particular instance it is alleged that the deputy chief once approached Theberge and began stroking her hair. He was put on unpaid administrative leave for two weeks and, the lawsuit says, ''allowed to take it a day each week for his convenience.'' Some male firefighters groped female victims in the rescue vehicle and bragged about it afterwards. They were put on unpaid administrative leave for two weeks, discipline that Webber, one of the attorney's for the two firefighters called ''disproportionate to their conduct.''

''Sexual harassment is alive and well in the city of Westbrook at a level that's shocking to imagine,'' Webber said.

Continue reading "Firefighters File Sexual Harassment Lawsuit" »

A sexual harassment and retaliation case filed by a former security officer at a jewerly store was settled for $405,000. The security guard claimed he was sexually harassed and terminated after reporting the harassment to management in violation of federal employment law. The security guard alleged that during his employment as a security officer he was subjected to various acts of sexual harassment, including unwanted sexual attention and sexual propositions from a female senior manager, numerous instances of inappropriate and unwanted physical contact, and inappropriate and offensive comments.

According to the lawsuit the security guard reported the sexual harassment to senior management in accordance with company policy and, after doing so, he was terminated by the harasser as an act of retaliation. After filing a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") the case was resolved through a negotiated settlement for $405,000.

According to court papers filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), Hobby Lobby prohibited Julie Tufts, an employee in its Rochester, Minn.-based store, to use her wheelchair when performing her job and failed to accommodate her inability to climb ladders. This is a violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act ("ADA") and as a result, Hobby Lobby agreed to pay Tufts $35,000 plus other relief to settle her discrimination claim. The ADA portion of her claim was that Tufts was unable to continue to work at Hobby Lobby due to the alleged discrimination and was discharged because she could not come back to work without use of the wheelchair.

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

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

Dominion Correctional Services, LLC and Corrections Corporation of America, both doing business as Crowley County Correctional Facility, paid $1.3 million and other significant remedial relief to settle a large sexual harassment lawsuit on behalf of 21 female former workers. The workers were allegedly subjected to a gender based hostile work environment and retaliation at an all-male, privately run medium security prison in Olney Springs, Colo.

According to the lawsuit the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") alleged female employees at the prison were subjected to unwelcome sexual harassment that included male managers forcing them to perform sex acts in order to keep their jobs. This adds new meaning to the idea of working hard to get ahead. According to the lawsuit a female officer made a complaint of sexual harassment against a male coworker, and was then placed in an isolated location, where she was raped by the man about whom she had complained.

Another shocking allegation is that the Chief of Security forced a female corrections officer to have intercourse with him, which she did in order to keep her job. Other male managers similarly expected their female subordinates to provide sexual favors. A female corrections officer was coerced first into performing oral sex, and later intercourse, with a male captain, for fear of losing her job. Another female officer testified that a male lieutenant regularly made comments to her about how she looked and commented that he could do a lot better than her husband. He then allegedly told her that if she wanted to keep her job she needed to sleep with him. She resigned.

"We at the EEOC see an unfortunately high number of sexual harassment cases, but what allegedly happened here was shocking,” said EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru. “No working woman should ever have to endure harassment and requests for sexual favors by managers in order to earn a paycheck – or suffer retaliation for complaining about the illegal harassment.”

Continue reading "Prison Pays $1.3 Million to Settle Sexual Harassment Case" »

According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") claims including a retaliation charge rose 23% in the year ended Sept. 30, 2008. The EEOC says more than a third of all claims filed with the agency have claims involving retaliation. Claims that didn't involve retaliation rose 12% during the same period. EEOC officials cite several reasons for the increase in retaliation claims. Due to the tough economy many employees feel slighted at being laid off or fired. Additionally, many companies are firing workers who complain because there are so many workers willing to take the employees job due to the tough job market. This is one instance where the squeaky wheel doesn't get the oil but gets the boot.

Retaliation is easier to prove than discrimination involving sexual harassment, or based on other forms of discrimination especially since a 2006 Supreme Court decision adopted a broader definition of retaliation. Many times a claim filed by the EEOC will have both a discrimination claim and retaliation claim. For example, an employee who is sexually harassed at work will report the harassment and then get fired or demoted. The employee will then file a claim with the EEOC for sexual harassment and retaliation.

M&N Equipment was sued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") alleging a woman was retaliated against after making a sexual harassment complaint against a co-worker. According to the lawsuit the women was sexual harassed while working at the compnay and complained to management about the harassment. The company not only failed to remedy the situation at work but engaged in retaliation against the women when she came forward.

The lawsuit alleges that during the four months after the woman complained about being sexually harassed the company retaliated by reducing her work hours, taking away her company car, not giving her a promised transfer, and then fired her without explanation. Then once the woman found work at another company, M&N Equipment called that company two days later and falsely maligned her work performance, resulting in her being fired by her new employer.

"It is particularly important for a woman to feel safe from retaliation when she speaks out against sexual harassment in a workplace," said Mary Jo O'Neill, regional attorney for the EEOC office. "This is precisely the reason our laws prohibit retaliation for sexual harassment complaints."

Chicken restaurant chain Seymour Zaxbys is being sued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") for sexual harassement and retaliation. According to the lawsuit two employees were sexual harassed and then complained about the sexual harassment. The same day that they complained about the sexual harassment they were both fired.

As a matter of law retaliation for complaining about sexual harassment violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII prohibits retaliating against employees who complain about alleged unlawful employment practices such as sexual harassment. In cases like this the EEOC will try to settle the case prior to filing a lawsuit. Damages which can be awarded in sexual harassment and retaliation cases include compensatory damages, punitive damages and an injunction against future discrimination. Also the company could be ordered to hire the employees back.

The Country Inn hotel is being sued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") for sexual harassment. The EEOC alleges the hotel’s management condoned the sexual harassment of several female employees and penalized the women when they complained about the hostile work environment. According to the lawsuit Candace Bland and other female servers including those under 18 were subjected to pervasive sexual harassment by two male coworkers.

According to allegations in the lawsuit, one man dropped his pants in front of the female employees and both male employees repeatedly engaged in offensive and unwelcome touching of female employees, including grabbing their breasts, “humping” against the women, slapping their buttocks and kissing them. Both men also made repeated requests for dates and persistent use of offensive and demeaning language towards the women.

Despite complaints by Bland and other women to the owner and other managers, the employer failed to take prompt measures to stop the harassment and after Bland filed a complaint with the EEOC her hours were cut and she was removed from work for a week. Other women who complained about the hostile work environment also had their hours reduced or the terms of their employment altered. In Illinois this type of conduct is called retaliation.

“It is unacceptable for an employer to punish employees who complain about sexual harassment by reducing their work hours and thereby reducing their income. Retaliation like this has a chilling effect on those who choose to exercise their federally protected rights and is blatantly illegal,” said EEOC Acting Regional Attorney Debra Lawrence.

A doctor at Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center filed a lawsuit against the hospital and her boss Hector Wong claiming gender discrimination and sexual harassment. The doctor accuses Wong of sexually harassing her beginning when she interviewed for a job at the hospital. Additionally the lawsuit alleges gender discrimination against her based on lesser pay than comparable male doctors. She also claims she was not promoted because she rejected Wong's sexual advances which is retaliation.

According to the doctor, she was threatened by Wong who is a martial artist after she rejected his sexual advances. At the same time her promotion was rejected and given to another female doctor who did not reject Wong's sexual advances, according to the lawsuit. The doctor claims the hospital should have known about Wong's sexual harassment and did not stop it.

The doctor claims Wong and the hospital retaliated against her after she filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") alleging sexual harassment against Wong and of the hospital.

Real estate agent Joseph H. Mancini and Mayor of Long Beach Township is being sued for sexual harassment. In the lawsuit Kymberly Oakes alleges she suffered economic losses, emotional pain and suffering and mental anguish after she rejected the sexual advances of her boss. The lawsuit states Mancini made numerous and repeated sexual advances toward Oakes who has been employed since 2006. The complaint states that Oakes began to reject the advances as she continued her employment.

The lawsuit alleges Mancini engaged in retaliation against Oakes after she rejected his advances and that Mancini used his position as her supervisor and mayor to retaliate by, threatening to accuse her of forging checks, refusing to pay Oakes commission for her work as an agent, interfering with her real estate clients and future business prospects. It is alleged he even threatened to revoke her real estate license.

"I can say it's meritorious. She has a strong case," John Sanders Oakes attorney said.

Halliburton employee Catarina Rose claims she was subjected to sexual harassment, and a hostile work environment and after reporting a sexual assault--retaliation. According to her lawsuit, Rose was subjected to egregious sexual harassment and intimidation by male coworkers and supervisors, including a sexual assault by a male co-worker.

Once Rose reported the sexual harassment she claims Halliburton management told her "I'll make it so hard on you out here that you'll quit," and "no one asked you to be here so deal with it," along with several other degrading and explicit proposals. Rose states she was forced to use her vacation time for the psychiatric evaluation that was required for her to return to work. The employee who committed the act was disciplined but allowed to return to work after a few days.

Continue reading "Halliburton Employee Sues For Sexual Harassment" »

Colleen Speaker a graduate student at the University of Southern Mississippi ("USM") settled her lawsuit with the school for $112,500. Speaker alleged sexual harassment from then-coach Randy Rowley. Rowley, 49, refused to talk about the matter and resigned his position from the university. The allegations included physical as well as mental sexual harassment. There aren't more specifics available at this time.

Speaker was hired as an assistant by Rowley and after she rejected his advances her position was eliminated. This would seem to be a clear case of retaliation and it is unclear if she is also filing a claim for that or if this settlement covers the alleged retaliation as well.

"I have absolutely no comment on any of that," Rowley said. "I resigned due to personal reasons."

Lindsay Gerken, 25 has been successful in her claim against Michael Ruppert and his company on her claims of sexual harassment and retaliation. The Oregon state Bureau of Labor and Industries ("BOLI") ordered Ruppert and his company to pay Gerken $127,713 in damages for the sexual harassment and retaliation. The ruling said that a continuing pattern of sexual harassment began shortly after Gerken was hired and included Ruppert coming to Gerken’s office door “wearing only his underwear and a smile.” Gerken declined Rupert’s explicit invitation to engage in a sexual relationship and was terminated the following week, which is obvious retaliation.

The Oregon BOLI is similar to the Illinois Department of Human Rights ("IDHR") and is in charge of investigating claims of sexual harassment and retaliation. Cases like this are not uncommon in the work place and it is very important to take immediate action to protect your rights if you are the victim of sexual harassment.

“BOLI will not allow employers to ignore fundamental protections for workers rights,” said Brad Avakian, the state labor commissioner. “Sexual harassment of this magnitude is a brazen violation of the law.”

Continue reading "Female Employee Awarded $127,713 in Sexual Harassment Case" »

Jennifer Braude a former associate at the law firm Maron Marvel Bradley and Anderson filed a sexual harassment lawsuit which is full of juicy details. There is a twist to this sexual harassment lawsuit however as the harassor is her female boss. According to court papers during the 18 months Braude was an associate at Maron Marvel Bradley & Anderson, she was subjected to a hostile work environment due to the sexually charged conversations initiated by her direct supervisor, Meredith Sossman. Sossman has since been fired and is now assistant vice president at Drexel University's Earle Mack School of Law.

The lawsuit alleges that Sossman talked about her own sexual interests, including engaging in foursomes and kissing her best female friend, who Sossman allegedly described as looking very similar to Braude. Sossman also allegedly made Braude turn around slowly when she entered the room so Sossman could see what she was wearing and made Braude's sex life the subject of discussion. Braude first file a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC").

Sossman would allegedly tell Braude she was dirty hot and pressured her to go with her to a sex toys shop in Concordville, Pa., to purchase a vibrator, directing her on how to use it and instructing her to report back to Sossman in the morning after she used it.

Continue reading "Female Law Partner Sued For Sexual Harassment Of Female Associate" »

Two brothers, Paul Martinez, 57, and John Martinez, 56 who own Arvada Mexican restaurant are being sued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") for sexual harassment of a 16-year-old employee, April Wyatt-now an adult. The two brothers are accused of physical and verbal sexual harassment and then retaliation when they fired the female employee after she complained of the sexual harassment.

According to the lawsuit starting in 2003 and ending in 2006, Paul Martinez repeatedly groped Wyatt by grabbing her backside, crotch and breast; pulled her underwear; and stuck his fingers in her mouth when she yawned. Martinez also shared inappropriate jokes and comments with Wyatt. By the end of 2006 Wyatt could no longer take the sexual harassment and complained. She was fired shortly thereafter which is retaliation.

“The conduct alleged here is reprehensible,” Stuart J. Ishimaru, acting chairman of the EEOC, said in a statement. “The harassment was compounded by the retaliation against a teenager who sought to complain about her illegal treatment.

Continue reading "Restaurant Sued For Sexual Harassment Of Minor" »

Tomayo Financial Services, based in Chicago Illinois was sued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") for sexual harassment and retaliation. Tomayo has four offices in Chicago and is a mortgage lending organization. According to the lawsuit female employees were sexually harassed and subjected to retaliation when they complained about the sexual harassment.

The EEOC claims numerous men employed at Tomayo, including executives, were part of continuous and widespread sexual harassment of women. The men referred to women with sexual epithets, engaged in threatening physical and verbal sexual conduct. The women reported the sexual harassment but nothing was done by Tomayo to stop the conduct and it only increased.

John Hendrickson, EEOC regional attorney for the Chicago District, said, “It does not matter what industry is involved—whether it’s automobiles, household products, mortgages—sexual harassment and retaliation are non-starters from both a business and a legal perspective.

Continue reading "Chicago's Tomayo Financial Services Sued For Sexual Harassment" »

Hilltown Packing is being sued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") for sexual harassment and retaliation. It all started when Filomena Ruelas who packed broccoli in the fields for the company between 1999 and 2005, faced sexual comments, propositions and touching from her supervisor. After reporting the behavior to management, she was not called back to work the next season, the suit says.

In cases like this many times the employer is not interested in helping to stop the sexual harassment because they are only interested in making money. Anyone who put a monkey wrench into the money makeing maching is deemed a trouble maker and retaliated against.

"All I wanted to do is work in peace and help support my family," Ruelas said.

Adams Brothers Farming Inc. is being sued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") on behalf of Yareli Uriostegui claiming sexual harassment and retaliation. According to the lawsuit Uriostegui was subjected to repeated sexual harassment and she complained about it to management which did nothing to stop the sexual harassment. Shortly after complaining about the sexual harassment Uriostegui was fired by Adams Brothers Farming Inc. which the EEOC claims is retaliation for reporting the sexual harassment.

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court and claims a foreman touched Uriostegui sexually many times and also verbally harassed her in a sexual nature. When Uriostegui complained, she was written up for poor performance and fired two weeks later. The EEOC is seeking compensatory damages, back pay, punitive damages and other injunctive relief.

Continue reading "Adams Brothers Farm Sued By EEOC For Sexual Harassment and Retaliation" »