Skip to main content

The Great EEOC Roundup: December 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 stand out.


Cato Corporation Pays $3.5 Million to Settle Systemic Investigation

The EEOC announced that the Cato Corporation will pay $3.5 million and update it’s reasonable accommodation policies for disabled or pregnant employees in order to resolve a nationwide, systemic investigation launched by the EEOC.  The investigation found that the Cato Corporation denied reasonable accommodations to certain pregnant employees or those with disabilities, made certain employees take unpaid leaves of absence, and/or terminated them because of their disabilities.  Failing to accommodate pregnant employees can place an employer in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  As for denying disabled employees job modifications, leaves of absence, or a return to work, this conduct can have employers run afoul of the Americans with Disabilities Act.  Employers, take this matter as a reminder to review your own accommodation policies...or risk having to settle for a rather large amount if your policies conflict with the relevant statutes.


Jury Verdict Returned Against Favorite Farms in Sexual Harassment & Retaliation Suit

Last week, a unanimous jury verdict was returned against Favorite Farms in regard to a sexual harassment and retaliation suit brought by a female farm worker against the company.  The jury found that the management at Favorite Farms failed to properly investigate a complaint made by the farm worker that she was raped by her supervisor.  Further, the company was found to have sent the farm worker home from work without pay the next work day and subsequently forced her to take a leave of absence.  Despite evidence that there were other sexual harassment claims made against the supervisor, no action was taken against him and he was allowed to continue supervising women in the fields.  This alleged conduct was found to be in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and such, the jury awarded the farm worker $850,000.00 in damages.

Comments

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,...

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

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. ...