Employment related race discrimination and retaliation for complaining about racial harassment violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination.  In two recent Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) Press Releases, the federal agency announced settlements of race discrimination and harassment lawsuits.  On June 2, 2009, the EEOC announced that a family medical center agreed to pay $85,280 and provide substantial injunctive relief to settle a race discrimination and retaliation lawsuit brought by EEOC attorneys in Michigan.  According to that Press Release, the EEOC lawsuit charged that the medical center subjected an African American supervisor to race discrimination and retaliation by failing to promote her and firing her after she complained about ongoing racial harassment.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/6-2-09.html .  Prior to that, the EEOC announced in a May 28, 2009 Press Release that a grocery store chain agreed to pay $27,000 to settle a race discrimination lawsuit brought by EEOC attorneys in Missouri.  According to the EEOC Press Release, the EEOC charged in that litigation that co-workers and a supervisor told racist jokes and directed racial slurs at the plaintiff who worked as a cook and deli clerk in the company’s Park Hills, Missouri store.  In this regard, the EEOC contended that some of the slurs were written on a wall and in a note taped on a door and that management failed to respond to her complaints.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/5-28-09b.html . 

Whether workplace race discrimination, race harassment and retaliation for complaining about it occurs in Cuero, Luling, Shiner or elsewhere, victims of unlawful workplace racial harassment may contact the EEOC and an attorney or lawyer to determine if a race discrimination lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential unlawful employment discrimination claim.

Attorneys with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) announced in a June 4, 2009 EEOC Press Release that the federal agency filed a disability discrimination lawsuit against a Chicago based global air carrier alleging that the company discriminated against a class of employees with disabilites by failing to provide job transfers to vacant positions, despite their qualifications, as a reasonable accommodation.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/6-4-09.html .  According to the EEOC Press Release, the lead class member worked as an airline mechanic for the company at the San Francisco Airport for over a decade before being diagnosed with a brain tumor, causing him to take leave and seek medical treatment.  When he returned to work, he could not be accommodated in his position as a mechanic, so he applied for a number of vacant positions for which he was qualified.  The Americans With Disabilities Act requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for employees with disabilities, and, under the statute, the EEOC says that reasonable accommodations specifically include reassignment to a vacant position.  However, instead of providing such an accommodation to him, the EEOC charges that the company violated the statute by rejecting him for all the positions he had applied for, even though he was qualified for those jobs.  The Press Release states that he was eventually placed on extended, involuntary leave by the company until he retired late last year.  The Press Release further states that all of the class members shared similar experiences.  An attorney quoted in the EEOC Press Release added that “The ADA clearly requires employers to make a reasonable accommodation when an employee can no longer perform the original job because of a disability.”  The EEOC said it filed the federal discrimination lawsuit in California after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement.  In this regard, the lawsuit seeks monetary damages on behalf of the affected class of employees, a court order to require the airline to change its policies to comply with the ADA, and ensuring the class members are reassigned to work in vacant jobs for which they are qualified.

During Fiscal Year 2008, disability discrimination charge filings with the EEOC nationwide rose to 19,453 - an increase of 10% from the prior fiscal year and the highest level in 14 years.  Further information about the EEOC is available in the agency’s website at www.eeoc.gov .

Whether employment related disability bias occurs in Longview, Lockhart, Luling or elsewhere, victims of workplace disability bias may contact the EEOC and an attorney or lawyer to determine if a disability discrimination lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential disability discrimination claim.

In a June 22, 2009 U.S. Department of Justice (”DOJ”) Press Release, the DOJ announced that a two-count federal grand jury indictment returned against a Spokane, Washington police officer has been unsealed.  According to the DOJ Press Release, the indictment charges the police officer with the deprivation of a victim’s civil rights on March 18, 2006 by repeatedly striking him with a baton and tasering him, resulting in bodily injury.  See, http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2009/June/09-crt-613.html .  The indictment also charges the police officer with making a false entry in a record in a matter investigated by a federal agency.  As stated in the Press Release, the civil rights charge carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment, a $250,000 fine, up to three years of court supervision after release and restitution.  The falsification of records in a matter investigated by a federal agency carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment, a $250,000 fine, and up to three years of court supervision after release.  However, an indictment is merely an accusation, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless proven guilty. 

Whether alleged civil rights violations by law enforcement occur in Baytown, Freeport, Port Lavaca or elsewhere, victims of police misconduct or abuse may contact the DOJ and an attorney or lawyer to determine if criminal charges and a civil rights lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential police brutality claim.

Attorneys with the U.S. Department of Justice (”DOJ”) announced in a June 19, 2009 DOJ Press Release that the DOJ filed a racial discrimination lawsuit against the former owner and managers of Homestead Mobile Home Village, a mobile home park in Gulfport, Mississippi, for allegedly violating the Fair Housing Act by discriminating against black tenants on the basis of race or color.  According to the Press Release, the federal lawsuit charges that the former managers of the mobile home park unjustly sought to evict a black couple and their five minor children who had moved there after being displaced by Hurricane Katrina.  See, http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2009/June/09-crt-610.html .  As further stated in the DOJ Press Release, the former managers attempted to evict the family and other black residents for allegedly violating rules of the park, but did not attempt to evict white residents for as many or more violations.  In addition, the DOJ claims that the former managers harassed and intimidated black tenants.  The lawsuit arose from a complaint filed with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development by two black residents of Homestead.  An attorney quoted in the Press Release stated “No one should have to suffer harassing, unequal treatment from a landlord based one’s race or color [and] the Justice Department will vigorously prosecute any landlord who engages in racial discrimination in violation of the Fair Housing Act.”  Individuals who may have information related to the lawsuit were instructed in the Press Release to contact the Justice Department at 601-965-4480 or toll free at 1-800-896-7743.  Visit the DOJ Civil Rights Division web site at http://www.usdoj.gov/crt for more information about the laws it enforces. 

Whether race discrimination occurs in Mississippi or elsewhere, victims of race and color discrimination may contact the appropriate federal or state agency and an attorney to determine if a racial discrimination lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential race discrimination claim.

Attorneys with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) announced in a July 1, 2009 EEOC Press Release that the federal agency filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against a St. Louis based plastic injection molding company, alleging the company violated federal law by subjecting a class of female employees at its Sherman, Mississippi plant to a sexually hostile work environment and forcing several of them to quit their jobs.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/7-1-09a.html .  According to the Press Release, the EEOC’s lawsuit charges that the company allowed a male supervisor and other male co-workers to harass a female press operator and other women at the Sherman, Mississippi plant.  The EEOC says the female workers were forced to endure myriad sexually explicit comments and propositions, and many of the victims were grabbed and touched by the male supervisor.  As stated in the Press Release, several women quit because of the harassment, and one women quit her job after the male supervisor phoned her at work threatening to sexually assault her in the employees’ parking lot.  Although several complaints were made by victims to management, the company failed to properly investigate complaints and stop the misconduct, the EEOC contends.  In addition, the EEOC states that this alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits harassment based on sex.  EEOC attorneys filed the sexual harassment lawsuit in Oxford, Mississippi after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement.  Further information about the EEOC is available in the agency’s website at www.eeoc.gov . 

Whether sexually hostile work conditions arise in Mississippi or elsewhere, victims of employment related sexual harassment may contact the EEOC and an attorney or lawyer to determine if a sexual harassment lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential hostile work environment claim.

According to a recent Associated Press article appearing in The Houston Sun, Attorney General Eric Holder has called for Congress to act to create new hate crime laws in order to stop what he called “violence masquerading as political activism.”  See, Margasak, Larry and Devlin Barrett (AP), “AG Holder Urges New Hate Crimes Law,” The Houston Sun, Vol.26, No.30, 6/16/09, p. 1.  As stated in the article, the AG’s call for Congress to act came as a civil rights coalition said there has been a surge in white supremacist activity since the election of the first African-American president and the economic downturn.  In making his comments, AG Holder cited separate attacks over a two-week period that killed a young soldier in Little Rock, an abortion provider in Wichita and a guard at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.  The violence, Holder said, “reminds us of the potential threat posed by violent extremists and the tragedy that ensues when reasoned discourse is replaced by armed confrontation.”  As reported in the article, Holder said that to stop such violence, Congress should pass an updated version of hate crimes legislation in order to more effectively prosecute those who commit violent attacks based on gender, disability or sexual orientation.  The growing number of hate crimes against Latinos also shows the need for tougher laws, Holder reportedly said. 

Whether hate crimes and injuries resulting from hate based violence occur in Beaumont, Dallas, Houston or elsewhere, hate crime victims may contact law enforcement and also an attorney or lawyer to determine if a hate crime or personal injury lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential hate crime claim.

In a July 1, 2009 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) Press Release, the federal agency announced that EEOC attorneys filed an age harassment and retaliation lawsuit in Hawaii alleging that a retail store violated federal law by subjecting a 73-year-old female pharmacist to age harassment, retaliation and forcing her out of her job.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/7-1-09.html .  As stated in the EEOC Press Release, the lawsuit charges that the pharmacy manager of a company store in Honolulu subjected the woman to age-based insults, such as telling her she was “too old to work,” that she “should retire,” should “retire from pharmacy work now,” and other discriminatory conduct.  According to the EEOC, the company received notice of the harassment but the company failed to take appropriate action to investigate and correct the hostile work environment, as the law requires.  Instead, the EEOC asserts, the company subjected the woman to a hostile work environment by berating her for lack of competence, making discriminatory comments in performance evaluations, telling her again to retire, and wrongfully accusing her of regulatory violations.  Finally, the pharmacist was forced to resign to escape the discriminatory conduct.  Age discrimination and retaliation for complaining about it violate the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the EEOC filed suit after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement.  An EEOC attorney quoted in the Press Release said “The EEOC is committed to preventing age harassment against workers.”  Further information about the EEOC is available on the agency’s website at www.eeoc.gov . 

Whether employment related age harassment and retaliation for complaining about it occurs in Cuero, Gonzales, Yoakum or elsewhere, victims of workplace age bias may contact the EEOC and an attorney or lawyer to determine if an age discrimination lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential age harassment claim.

Attorneys with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) announced in a July 2, 2009 Press Release that the federal agency sued a nationwide commercial property management company, claiming the company violated federal law by subjecting Hispanic employees to national origin discrimination.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/7-2-09.html .  According to the EEOC’s national origin discrimination lawsuit, a class of Hispanic housekeepers were subjected to a hostile work environment while performing custodial and janitorial duties at the Ceasar’s Palace Forum Shops in Las Vegas.  As stated in the EEOC Press Release, the harassment allegedly began in 2005 when the housekeeping lead shift was hired and ended when he was terminated for reasons related to the harassment.  The lawsuit charges that the housekeeping lead shift referred to housekeepers and other Latino employees as “wetbacks,” “tacos,” and “burritos” and repeatedly told them to “go back to Mexico.”  In addition, the EEOC asserts that he told Latinos that Mexicans have “inferior intelligence and capability in comparison to whites, and that is why whites are in power.”  The alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the EEOC filed the lawsuit after first attempting a voluntary settlement.  An EEOC attorney was quoted in the Press Release as saying that “All workers have the right to work in an environment free of discrimination and daily harassment.”  For further information about the EEOC, see www.eeoc.gov .

The U.S. Department of Justice (”DOJ”) announced in a July 1, 2009 Press Release that Beazer Homes USA Inc. has agreed to pay the United States $5 million dollars, plus contingent payments of up to $48 million dollars to be shared with victimized private homeowners, to resolve allegations that it, and Beazer Mortgage Corp., were involved in fraudulent mortgage origination activities in connection with federally insured mortgages.  See, http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2009/July/09-civ-654.html .  According to the DOJ Press Release, the settlement is in conjunction with a Deferred Prosecution Agreement entered into between the companies and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of North Carolina.  The Deferred Prosecution Agreement provides for restitution to private homeowners who were victims of the companies’ alleged fraudulent activities, as well as to the Federal Housing Administration.

In a June 18, 2009 Department of Labor OSHA Regional News Release, the U.S. Department of Labor (”DOL”) announced that over the last 16 months, compliance officers from the DOL’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (”OSHA”) have made nine visits to Mississippi companies where employees may be exposed to potential dust hazards.  According to the DOL News Release, the result has been 67 citations for workplace safety and health violations, with 88% categorized as willful, serious, repeat or failure to abate.  The visits are part of the agency’s ongoing National Emphasis Program to reduce employees’ exposure to combustible dust hazards.  Industries affected by the emphasis program reportedly include: agriculture, chemical, textile, forest products, wastewater treatment, metal processing, paper processing, pharmaceutical and metal, paper and plastic recycling.  Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, OSHA’s role is to assure healthful working conditions for America’s working men and women by setting and enforcing standards, and providing training, outreach and education.  For more information in this regard, visit www.osha.gov .