Skip to main content

The Great EEOC Roundup: December Edition


As always, there are some recent EEOC cases that jump out at me when I review recent developments on that front.  Below are a couple EEOC cases and settlements that stand out:


EEOC Claim Against Costco to Proceed to a Jury

Recently, a federal district judge held that an EEOC claim that alleged that Costco violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (by failing to prevent a male customer from stalking and harassing a female employee) will proceed to a jury.  In denying Costco's motion for summary judgment, the court held that there was sufficient evidence to allow the claim to proceed.  Of note, the female employee was subjected to harassing behavior by the male customer for over a year and the conduct continued to escalate (including unwanted touching, "ominous" staring, and other intrusive actions.  The court found that there was evidence that Costco failed to take reasonable steps to stop the harassment, thus the hostile work environment claim was allowed to proceed to a jury.


EEOC Files Disability Discrimination Claim Against McDonald's

The EEOC filed a disability discrimination claim against McDonald's and McDonald's Restaurants of Missouri on the grounds that it violated the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") by refusing to accommodate and hire a deaf applicant.  According to the suit, Ricky Washington, who was deaf, applied for a position at McDonald's.  He indicated he had attended a school for the deaf on his application and that he had also previously worked at a McDonald's before.  When the manager of the location where Washington applied learned of the need for a sign language interpreter for the interview, she cancelled the interview and would not reschedule.  Even though other interviews were conducted with other applicants and new hires were made, Washington's interview was never rescheduled.  This alleged conduct violated the ADA by discriminating against Washington as a result of his disability.


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