Tag Archives: EEOC

by | January 23, 2013 · 8:11 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Texas Restaurant Group Settles EEOC “Religious Discrimination Lawsuit” For $25,000; Female Employee Prevented From Wearing Skirt To Work

“…Fries Restaurant Management has  agreed to pay Ashanti McShan $20,000 for “mental anguish and non-wage damages” and an additional $5,000 in lost wages…The restaurant management company also EEOCagreed to post its policy against religious discrimination on employee bulletin boards in every Burger King it operates in the state of Texas…”

A Burger King in Texas has agreed to pay $25,000 to a Pentecostal womanwho wore a skirt to work, court documents state. The payment settles a lawsuit filed in August by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against Fries Restaurant Management, LLC, which owns and operates the Burger King in Grand Prairie, Texas. The store allegedly asked a teenage woman to leave work after she arrived in a skirt. The EEOC’s lawsuit against Fries alleged religious discrimination, which is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964.

In addition, it vowed to hold trainings for managers on federal anti-discrimination laws for the next two years, according to the documents.

McShan was a senior in high school when she came to work at the Burger King wearing a skirt instead of the black pants that are part of Burger King’s uniform.

In August 2010, McShan asked to wear a skirt instead of the restaurant’s uniform pants. Burger King “assured her that she could wear a skirt to work,” the filing says.

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Texas Restaurant Group Settles EEOC “Religious Discrimination Lawsuit” For $25,000; Female Employee Prevented From Wearing Skirt To Work

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Training

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | January 19, 2013 · 8:17 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Wisconsin Restaurant Settles EEOC “Sexual Harassment And Retaliation Lawsuit” For $41,000; Companies Must Take “Immediate And Effective Action To Stop It”

“The Supreme Court has held that when an employer learns of sexual harassment, it must take immediate and effective action to stop it…Employers who don’t protect their workers should know that the federal EEOCgovernment will enforce the national policy against sexual abuse in the workplace…retaliation complaints have been the fastest-increasing type of complaint filed with the EEOC over the past 10 years…”

A Merrill, Wis., restaurant will pay $41,000 and furnish other relief  under a consent decree entered by the federal court in a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today.

According to the EEOC’s suit (EEOC and Sherry L. Brown v. Merrill Pine Ridge LLC, et al., No. 3:11-cv-589), one of the cooks at New Pine Ridge restaurant, Shahi N. Selmani, created a sexually hostile work environment when he repeatedly made crude remarks to waitresses and grabbed their breasts.  The EEOC alleged that, despite the women’s complaints, restaurant owner Qemal Alimi did not stop Selmani’s harassment and instead fired some of the waitresses in retaliation for their complaints.

Sexual harassment and retaliation for complaining about it violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  The EEOC filed suit in August 2011 after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.

Selmani did not stop working for the restaurant until months after criminal charges were filed against him.  Eventually he pled no contest on Dec. 9, 2010 in Lincoln County Circuit Court (Case Nos. 2009CM25 and 2009CM101) to having committed Class A misdemeanor battery against three waitresses.  Charges of fourth-degree sexual assault, bail jumping and disorderly conduct were dismissed but “read into” the record of his conviction.

For more:  http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/1-17-13a.cfm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Wisconsin Restaurant Settles EEOC “Sexual Harassment And Retaliation Lawsuit” For $41,000; Companies Must Take “Immediate And Effective Action To Stop It”

Filed under Insurance, Labor Issues, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Training

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | January 12, 2013 · 7:49 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Restaurant Franchisee Settles EEOC “Sexual Harassment And Retaliation Lawsuit” For $2.5 Million; Managers Made Working Conditions Intolerable

The EEOC’s suit charged that Carrols subjected a class of women – including many teenagers – to egregious sexual harassment at Burger King locations throughout the Midwest, Southeast, and Northeast. EEOC alleged that the harassment, which ranged from obscene comments, jokes, and propositions to unwanted touching, EEOCexposure of genitalia, strip searches, stalking, and even rape, was perpetrated by managers in the majority of cases. According to the EEOC, Carrols also retaliated against some of the women by cutting their hours, manufacturing discipline against them, and even firing them, while it forced more women to quit because the harassment made their working conditions intolerable.

Carrols Corporation, the world’s largest Burger King franchisee, will pay $2.5 million and take significant remedial steps to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today. The lawsuit alleged discrimination against 89 female employees around the country, many of whom were teenagers when they worked for Carrols.

Sexual harassment and retaliation for complaining about it violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC filed suit (Civil Action No. 98-cv-01772 FWS/TWD in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York) after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement.

Under the terms of the publicly-filed consent decree resolving the case, Carrols will pay $2.5 million in compensatory damages and lost wages to the 89 victims. It also will implement a number of measures to increase employees’ awareness of Carrols’ anti-harassment policies and to improve Carrols’ response to complaints brought forward under those policies. Those measures include enhanced training for Carrols’ managers in preventing and responding to harassment; improved mechanisms for tracking harassment complaints; notices posted in all domestic Carrols Burger King locations informing employees about the lawsuit’s resolution and their rights under federal anti-discrimination laws; and an injunction prohibiting further harassment and retaliation.

For more: http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/1-9-13.cfm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Restaurant Franchisee Settles EEOC “Sexual Harassment And Retaliation Lawsuit” For $2.5 Million; Managers Made Working Conditions Intolerable

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | January 9, 2013 · 7:34 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Maryland Restaurant Settles EEOC “Disability Discrimination And Retaliation Lawsuit” For $47,000; Deaf Prep Cook Was Harassed And Mocked

“…(the plaintiff) was harassed by a former management official because of his disability, through mockery (e.g. being called “vermin” instead of “Vernon”), and through threatening physical conduct…(his) prep cook EEOCduties were removed and that he was transferred to a dishwasher position because of his disability….In addition to the $47,814 in monetary relief to Davis, the two-year consent decree resolving the lawsuit enjoins McCormick and Schmick’s from violating the ADA, including with regard to harassment and retaliation…”

McCormick & Schmick’s Seafood Restaurant, Inc. will pay $47,814 and provide other relief to settle a disability discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed by the U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today.

According to the EEOC’s suit, Vernon Davis, who has been deaf since childhood and uses American Sign Language and reads lips to communicate, satisfactorily performed his duties as a prep cook at the McCormick & Schmick’s National Harbor restaurant in Oxon Hill, Md. Prior to being hired by the defendant, Davis had obtained culinary training and had worked in several other restaurants.

After Davis and others complained about Davis being subjected to disability discrimination, the restaurant demoted him to a janitorial-type position and cut his hours because of his disability and in retaliation for the complaints, the EEOC charged. Four months later, McCormick and Schmick’s unlawfully fired Davis because of his disability and in retaliation for his complaints, the EEOC alleged in its lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Southern Division, Civil Action No. 8:11-cv-02695.

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Maryland Restaurant Settles EEOC “Disability Discrimination And Retaliation Lawsuit” For $47,000; Deaf Prep Cook Was Harassed And Mocked

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Training

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | December 26, 2012 · 6:57 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Workplace Discrimination Lawsuits Increase As Companies Employ "Ethnically Diverse Labor Force"; Hotel Worker Mocked For His "Accent" Awarded $500,000 Settlement

Earlier this year, an Iraqi hotel worker in Phoenix won a $500,000 settlement from the Four Points Sheraton. EEOCHe claimed his co-workers mocked his accent and called him derogatory names. According to the EEOC, the worker’s managers didn’t take his complaints seriously, which made his workplace situation intolerable.

Workplace discrimination complaints based on national origin, including those involving language ability, increased by 76 percent from 1997 to 2011, according to the EEOC. The agency says the trend reflects a more ethnically diverse labor force.

Civil rights advocates say workplaces have become more hostile toward workers who don’t speak perfect English.

“There’s definitely a climate of fear that’s bad for everyone,” John Mejia, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), told Insurance Journal.

Some workers have won large settlements in accent-related lawsuits.

For more:  http://www.insidecounsel.com/2012/12/26/accent-related-discrimination-suits-on-the-rise-sa

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Workplace Discrimination Lawsuits Increase As Companies Employ "Ethnically Diverse Labor Force"; Hotel Worker Mocked For His "Accent" Awarded $500,000 Settlement

Filed under Claims, Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Training

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | November 30, 2012 · 7:28 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Arizona Restaurant Settles EEOC "Pregnancy Discrimination" Lawsuit For $15,000; Servers Removed From "Sunday Football Schedule"

“…The EEOC’s lawsuit…charged that Sandbar instituted a policy of removing pregnant women from its Sunday schedule at its Peoria restaurant in an attempt to allegedly satisfy its male Sunday football EEOCcustomers… it believed its male customers did not wish to see pregnant women while they watched Sunday football games. Working on Sundays during football season was the most or one of the most lucrative shifts during the week for the pregnant employee…”

A Peoria, Ariz., restaurant will pay $15,000 and furnish other relief to settle a pregnancy discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today. The EEOC had alleged that West Sand, LLC, doing business as Sandbar Mexican Grill, unlawfully removed a pregnant employee from working on Sundays during football season because she was pregnant.

According to the EEOC, pursuant to this policy, Sandbar removed a pregnant woman from its lucrative Sunday schedule, causing her a significant loss of income. Sandbar denied the discrimination.

Sandbar Mexican Grill will pay $15,000 to the female employee to resolve this EEOC case. Under the consent decree settling the suit, Sandbar also must also (1) provide anti-discrimination training for all employees who work at its Peoria location; (2) review and revise, if necessary, its policies to ensure they prohibit sex and pregnancy discrimination as well as retaliation and ensure a strong and clear commitment to a workplace free of such bias; (3) investigate allegations of sex discrimination, pregnancy discrimination and retaliation promptly, fairly, reasonably, and effectively and ensure that appropriate corrective action is taken; and (4) post a notice that sex and pregnancy discrimination -or retaliation for complaining about it – is unlawful.

“Pregnancy discrimination remains a persistent problem in the 21st-century workplace,” said Mary Jo O’Neill, regional attorney of the EEOC’s Phoenix District Office. “Employers cannot disadvantage the terms and conditions of a pregnant employee’s work to satisfy an assumed customer preference about the physical appearance of employees, which is likely untrue in any event.”

EEOC District Director Rayford Irvin added, “The EEOC will continue to be vigilant in rooting out pregnancy discrimination. This type of unlawful exclusion is never a winning game plan.”

For more:  http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/11-28-12a.cfm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Arizona Restaurant Settles EEOC "Pregnancy Discrimination" Lawsuit For $15,000; Servers Removed From "Sunday Football Schedule"

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | November 19, 2012 · 7:26 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Michigan Hotel Sued By EEOC For "Terminating Pregnant Housekeeper"; Employers May Not Exclude Pregnant Women Based On Their "Concerns About Safety Of Unborn Child"

“…Ramin fired a housekeeper shortly after it learned of her pregnancy. The company stated that it could not allow her to continue to work as a housekeeper because of the potential harm to the development of her baby…”

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a lawsuit today charging that Ramin, Inc., a Comfort Inn & Suites franchise owner in Taylor, Mich., violated federal law when it terminated a pregnant housekeeper because of her pregnancy.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, protects female employees against discrimination based on pregnancy, and the Supreme Court has expressly rejected the notion that an employer may exclude pregnant women from employment based on its own concerns about the safety of the unborn child.

The EEOC seeks injunctive relief to prevent Ramin from discriminating against pregnant employees or applicants in the future, as well as monetary relief on behalf of the victim.  The EEOC filed suit after first attempting to settle the case through its conciliation process.

“Pregnancy discrimination is rarely subtle,” said Lauren Gibbs Burstein, attorney in the EEOC’s Detroit Field Office.  “Employers may not bar pregnant employees from work because of outdated myths or stereotypes.  The EEOC will vigorously defend the rights of pregnant workers to provide for their families by remaining employed.”

For more:  http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/11-13-12c.cfm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Michigan Hotel Sued By EEOC For "Terminating Pregnant Housekeeper"; Employers May Not Exclude Pregnant Women Based On Their "Concerns About Safety Of Unborn Child"

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Training

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | November 10, 2012 · 7:57 am

Hospitality Industry Employee Risks: California Hotel Settles "Sexual Harassment And Retaliation Lawsuit" With EEOC For $195,000

In 2010, a female employee filed the EEOC charge of discrimination alleging that a male supervisor made sexual comments and referenced an image of a sexual nature.  The female employee further alleged that upon reporting the sexual harassment, the male supervisor retaliated against her by issuing written discipline and treating her differently.

DNC Parks & Resorts at Tenaya, Inc. which operates Tenaya Lodge, a hotel and resort near Yosemite National Park in California, will pay $195,000 and furnish other relief to settle a federal charge of sexual harassment and retaliation filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced today.

Following an EEOC investigation, the director of EEOC’s Fresno Local Office determined that there was reasonable cause to believe that the female employee was sexually harassed due to her gender, female, and that she was subjected to retaliation for reporting the harassment, a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.  The EEOC also found reasonable cause to believe that a class of other female employees was also sexually harassed due to gender.  Tenaya Lodge denied the allegations of sexual harassment and retaliation, and the company did not admit to liability while agreeing to settle the matter.

Following the EEOC’s determination, the EEOC entered into a one-year conciliation agreement with Tenaya Lodge and the female employee in question.  The agreement effectively settles the case administratively, thereby avoiding litigation.  The agreement provides for $100,000 in monetary relief for the female employee who filed the EEOC charge.  An additional $95,000 is designated as a class fund for eligible claimants who also encountered sexual harassment and/or retaliation while working at Tenaya Lodge.

Aside from the monetary relief, Tenaya Lodge will provide equal employment opportunity training for all current employees and, thereafter, for all new hires in the language that the employee understands, along with additional training for managerial and human resources staff on how to deal with discrimination, harassment and retaliation.  Tenaya Lodge also agreed to post a notice about the settlement in English and Spanish; to report future instances of discrimination to the EEOC; and to publicize the settlement via press release.

Workers have the right to report sexual harassment or other forms discrimination on the job without negative repercussions,” said Melissa Barrios, director of the EEOC’s Fresno Local Office.  “We commend Tenaya Lodge for working with the Commission to resolve this matter and for agreeing to implement measures to protect their employees from harassment, discrimination and retaliation.”

For more:  http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/11-7-12.cfm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employee Risks: California Hotel Settles "Sexual Harassment And Retaliation Lawsuit" With EEOC For $195,000

Filed under Employment Practices Liability, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Training

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | November 3, 2012 · 7:30 am

Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Hawaiian Restaurant Group Sued By EEOC For "Rampant Sexual Harassment Of Female Employees"

In its lawsuit, the EEOC asserts that a class of at least nine female servers and bartenders were repeatedly bombarded with sexual propositions, explicit sexual remarks, groping, grabbing, and exposure of genital areas by male managers, and even ordered to perform sexual favors for high-level Señor Frog officials. 

Señor Frog’s, a popular chain of Mexican-themed restaurants and bars, violated federal law by allowing the rampant sexual harassment of its female employees in Honolulu by high-level officials including the company owner, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it filed today against both Señor Frog’s and Altres, Inc.  Altres, a Hawaiian staffing company, was contracted by Señor Frog’s to provide human resources services and oversee the company’s non-management staff at the Señor Frog’s restaurant & bar in Honolulu.

The widespread sexual harassment was out of control, stemming from Señor Frog’s owner himself, who permitted other Honolulu restaurant managers and supervisors to do the same, according to the EEOC.  Women were also treated differently with respect to being passed over for promotions, obtaining less favorable shifts and earning less than their male counterparts.

The EEOC contends that at least one of the victims was compelled to quit as a result, while others were disciplined or had their hours cut in retaliation for complaining of the harassment and discrimination.  As the joint employer, the EEOC claims that Altres is also liable for the hostile work environment endured by the Señor Frog’s staff, many of whom were employed by Altres on paper, according to company records.

Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  The EEOC filed suit (EEOC v. La Rana Hawaii, LLC dba Señor Frog’s & Altres, Inc., Case No. CV-11-00799 LEK BMK) after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.  The EEOC’s suit seeks all available relief, including lost wages, front pay and compensatory and punitive damages for the class of women.  Substantial remedies, including policy changes and staff training, are also being sought by the EEOC in order to prevent and appropriately address future instances of sexual harassment, discrimination and retaliation.

For more:  http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/11-2-12.cfm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Employment Risks: Hawaiian Restaurant Group Sued By EEOC For "Rampant Sexual Harassment Of Female Employees"

Filed under Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | September 30, 2012 · 7:06 am

Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Texas Restaurant Chain Sued By EEOC For Firing "Pregnant Employees Under A Discriminatory Written Policy"

“…According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, Maryann Castillo and other female workers were laid off after the third month of their pregnancies under a written policy, set out in Bayou City Wings’ employee handbook…”

JC Wings Enterprises, LLC, doing business as Bayou City Wings, a Baytown-based restaurant chain, violated federal law when its managers laid off pregnant employees under a discriminatory policy, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it filed today.

  Bayou City Wings owns and operates restaurants in Baytown, Houston and surrounding areas.  The company’s district manager laid off Castillo pursuant to the policy even though she had provided a doctor’s note that indicated she could work up to the 36th week of her pregnancy and that her doctor had not placed any restrictions on her ability to work.

During the EEOC’s investigation of a discrimination charge brought by Castillo, Bayou City Wings named eight female employees who were laid off from work because of their pregnancies.  According to a Bayou City Wings general store manager, for a manager to keep a pregnant employee at work any longer would “be irresponsible in respect to her child’s safety” and would jeopardize his position with the company “for not following procedures.”

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sex or pregnancy.  The EEOC filed suit (Civil Action No. 4:12-cv-02885) in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.   The EEOC seeks an injunction, back pay with pre-judgment interest, reinstatement or front pay, compensatory damages and punitive damages, in amounts to be determined at trial.

For more:  http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/9-12-26d.cfm

Comments Off on Hospitality Industry Legal Risks: Texas Restaurant Chain Sued By EEOC For Firing "Pregnant Employees Under A Discriminatory Written Policy"

Filed under Insurance, Labor Issues, Liability, Management And Ownership, Risk Management, Training

Tagged as , , , , ,