Albertsons Pays $8.9 Million to Settle Race/National Origin and Retaliation Claims

Posted on January 15, 2010 by Christopher McKinney

Albertsons, LLC, a national grocery chain, will pay $8.9 million and furnish other relief to settle three employment discrimination lawsuits filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Oppor tunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today. The EEOC had charged Albertsons with race, color, and national origin discrimination and retaliation at its Aurora, Colo., distribution center. The monetary relief will be distributed among 168 former and current employees.

All three of the EEOC’s cases stemmed from incidents at the Aurora distribution center, which is being closed for unrelated reasons. The first case, EEOC v. Albertsons LLC, Civil Action No. 06-cv-01273, was filed in 2006 and alleged a pattern or practice of workplace harassment and discrimin ation based on race, color and national origin. According to the lawsuit, minority employees were repeatedly subjected to derogatory comments and graffiti. Blacks were termed “n-----s” and Hispanics termed “s---s,” among other offensive epithets.

The EEOC said the offensive graffiti included racial and ethnic slurs, depictions of lynchings, swastikas, and white supremacist and anti-immigrant statements. The graffiti in a commonly used men’s room was so offensive that several employees would relieve themselves outside the building or go home at lunchtime rather than use the restroom. Some of this graffiti remained for years until the restroom was remodeled in 2005.

The EEOC also charged that minority employees were given harder work assignments and were more frequently and severely disciplined than their white co-workers. According to the EEOC, managers were aware of, and even participated in, the harassment and discrimination.

The second lawsuit, EEOC v. Albertsons LLC, Civil Action No. 08-cv-00640, was filed in 2008 and alleged a pattern or practice of retaliation. The EEOC alleged that dozens of employees complained about the discriminatory treatment and harassment and were subsequently given the harder job assignments, were passed over for promotion and even fired as retaliation.

The third case, EEOC v. Albertsons LLC, Civil Action No. 08-cv-02424, was also filed in 2008 and alleged race discrimination on behalf of a single African American employee at the distribution center who was terminated.

 

Source: EEOC Press

Tags: , , ,

EEOC Using New and Improved ADA to Sue for Pregnancy Discrimination

Posted on October 27, 2009 by Christopher McKinney

Prior to Congress' recent amendments to the ADA, few if any lawyers would have given serious consideration to using the ADA as an avenue to sue for a pregnancy-related condition instead of bringing a traditional pregnancy discrimination claim pursuant to Title VII.  The fact that the EEOC has recently filed a lawsuit seeking to do just that speaks volumes about the how much stronger the ADA is perceived to be by practitioners following the recent amendments.  

The EEOC’s lawsuit charges that D.R. Horton (NYSE:DHI) refused to accommodate a female project manager in Kirkland, Wash., when it denied her additional unpaid leave time after her doctor placed her on bed rest for over seven months as a result of pregnancy-related complications. Although the company initially provided some leave time, it finally stated it was against company policy to provide the employee any more leave time, even if it was unpaid, and then fired her.

The EEOC, filing suit on the employee's behalf, has apparently determined that it can bring a stronger case under the new and improved ADA than it could by utilizing Title VII's protections against pregnancy discrimination.  This will be an interesting case to watch.  

According to the company's website, D.R. Horton is the biggest home builder in the United States and a Fortune 500 company with operations in 28 states and headquarters in Fort Worth, Texas.

 

 

 

Tags: , ,

EEOC Files Class National Origin Harassment Suit Against Hilton Hotel

Posted on October 1, 2009 by Christopher McKinney

 

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed suit last Friday against Fireside West, LLC, doing business as the Hilton in Lisle/Naperville, Ill., charging that the hotel violated Title VII by subjecting its Hispanic employees to a hostile work environment. The EEOC’s complaint said that the hotel subjected Hispanic employees to frequent ethnic slurs from the hotel’s executive chef.

The EEOC’s lawsuit, in U.S. District Court in Chicago (Civil Action 09-CV-05979, assigned to District Judge James B. Zagel and Magistrate Judge Maria G. Valdez), arose out of charges of discrimination filed with the EEOC by two former employees of the hotel. The EEOC’s administrative investigation which preceded the lawsuit, supervised by EEOC Chicago District Director John Rowe, revealed that the executive chef would allegedly openly refer to Hispanic employees under his supervision with derogatory terms such as “wetbacks,” “f----ing Mexicans,” and “stupid Mexicans.”

 

Tags: ,

EEOC Sues AT&T For Disability Discrimination

Posted on September 29, 2009 by Christopher McKinney

AT&T Services, Inc., doing business as Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, L.P. (AT&T), a major telephone company, violated federal law by refusing to hire an applicant simply because he is an insulin-dependent diabetic, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it filed last week.

According to the EEOC’s suit, AT&T violated the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) by failing to hire an applicant as a cable splicer technician in Austin only because of his “insulin use” for type 2 diabetes. Indeed, according to the EEOC, the applicant indisputably had the necessary experience and expertise to perform the job and had previously safely performed a similar job for AT&T for many years after he was diagnosed with diabetes.

Refusing to hire a qualified individual because of his or her disability, record of disability, or because the employer perceives a person as being disabled, violates the ADA. After the EEOC’s San Antonio Field office determined that AT&T had violated the law, it filed suit (CASE NO. A09CA700JN) in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement. The EEOC seeks back pay, compensatory damages and punitive damages for the victim, as well as injunctive relief.

Tags: ,