Skip to main content

The Great EEOC Roundup: January Edition


As always, there are some EEOC cases that jump out at me when I review developments on that front.  Below are a couple EEOC cases and settlements that caught my eye this month.


Rainbow USA, Inc. to Pay $11,000.00 to Settle Pregnancy Discrimination Claim

Earlier this month, it was announced that Rainbow USA, Inc. ("Rainbow") had agreed to pay $11,000.00 to settle a pregnancy discrimination claim, filed by a former employee.  According to the EEOC lawsuit, Rainbow indefinitely suspended a pregnant junior assistant manager and subsequently terminated her two days after learning of her pregnancy related restrictions.  This alleged conduct is in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as well as the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978.  As always, I would suggest employers use this announced settlement (and the following settlements) as a reminder of what types of conduct is in violation of federal law.


Hawaii Medical Service Association to Pay $180,000.00 to Settle Disability Discrimination Claim

Hawaii Medical Service Association ("HMSA"), a health insurance company in Hawaii, has agreed to pay $180,000.00 to resolve a disability discrimination claim.  The lawsuit revolved around a claim that HMSA violated the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") when the company decided to not allow intermittent leave as a possible accommodation for employees with disabilities (in its customer relations department.)  HMSA was also alleged to have not engaged in the interactive process with its employees to determine if there were other accommodations available for them.  As a result, the disable employees were apparently forced to either work without an accommodation or resign.  This alleged conduct is in violation of the ADA, which prohibits employers from discriminating against (and not engaging in the interactive process) with disabled employees.


Greensboro Zaxby's Franchisee to Pay $30,000.00 to Settle Sexual Harassment & Retaliation Claim

A Greensboro Zaxby's franchisee has agreed to pay $30,000.00 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation claim, following allegations that the restaurant's general manager made sexually inappropriate comments and requests for sex with a female cashier on an almost daily basis.  After complaining about the conduct, the cashier was terminated.  This alleged conduct is in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits employers from allowing a sexually hostile work environment to exist and from taking any retaliatory action against an employee that complains about the misconduct.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more