Skip to main content

The Great EEOC Roundup: May 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:


Applebee's Faces Sexual Harassment Claim

Earlier this month, the EEOC filed a sexual harassment claim against Applebee's on the grounds that a male assistant manager created a sexually hostile work environment for two female employees and restaurant management, apparently aware of the alleged harassment, allowed the situation to exist.  According to the suit, the male assistant manager sexually harassed the two female employees, both sisters, for several months in 2014.  This alleged harassment 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 in the workplace.


$57,000.00 Settlement Reached on Sex Discrimination Claim

A settlement was reached between the EEOC and an education company recently in which the company will pay $57,000.00 to resolve a sex discrimination claim filed by a former job applicant.  The job applicant alleged that the company's CEO asked her out on a date and suggested that she "party" with him after she had been offered a position with the company.  After she declined the CEO's offer and said she hoped "we can move forward in a strictly professional manner", the company declined to hire her and instead hired a male candidate.  This conduct violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits discrimination based on sex and forbids retaliating against individuals who object to this discrimination.  A note to employers (and those in charge of interviewing and hiring job applicants):  Do not ask applicants out on dates or to "party" and then turn around and decline to hire them when they say no.  As this case demonstrates, more often than not, that leads to major problems and avoidable litigation.


Ruby Tuesday Charged With Age Discrimination at Boca Raton Location

Earlier this month, the EEOC filed an age discrimination suit against Ruby Tuesday after one of its locations in Boca Raton allegedly refused to hire a qualified applicant because of his age.  The EEOC alleged in its suit that although the applicant had over 20 years of experience in the food and beverage industry, the chain location refused to hire him for a general manager position because the company wanted a candidate who could "maximize longevity".  This alleged conduct is in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA") which prohibits discriminating against an employee or applicant because of their age.  With suit having just been filed, this has a ways to go before a final resolution is reached.  Stay tuned.

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

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies i...
Post a Comment
Read more

What I've Been Reading This Week

Recently, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Commissioner, Chai Feldblum, had her re-nomination on the brink, after Utah Republican Senator Mike Lee took steps to block it .  Readers might have heard that late last week, Commissioner Feldblum's re-nomination quietly slipped away and she tweeted out a thank you to supporters and friends, acknowledging that her time at the EEOC was over.  While there has not been much in the way of a further update in regard to that ongoing saga, we wait to see how things will play out at the EEOC, now that it has lost a quorum until additional Commissioners are confirmed by the Senate. For the time being, there are other developments for readers to review this week.  In particular, I call attention to the article on managing a wage & hour audit by the Department of Labor as well as steps an employer can take to better ensure compliance with the ADA. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. ...
Post a Comment
Read more