An Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) regional attorney is quoted in an April 9, 2009 EEOC Press Release as saying that “Under federal law, employers are required to maintain an environment free of sexual harassment and retaliation.”  In this regard, the EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, and, in its April 9, 2009 Press Release, the federal agency announced that Cracker Barrel Old Country Stores, Inc. will pay $255,000.00 and provide other relief to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by EEOC attorneys in Tennessee.  According to the EEOC Press Release, the EEOC’s lawsuit charged that the Tennessee based restaurant chain allowed its general manager, managers, and other male employees to subject a class of women at its Cedar Bluff, Tennessee location to sexual harassment and retaliated against at least two of them.  The Press Release stated further that the general managers, other managers and male employees allegedly made repeated and unwanted sexual jokes and lewd remarks.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/4-9-09.html .  Sexual harassment and retaliation for complaining about it violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Further information about the EEOC may be found in the agency’s website at www.eeoc.gov .

In Texas, the Texas Workforce Commission Civil Rights Division (”TWCCRD”) enforces the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act; which has been codified in to Texas Labor Code, Chapter 21.  According to the TWCCRD “Employment Discrimination Fact Sheets,” sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Chapter 21 of the Texas Labor Code and Title VII of the Civil rights Act of 1964.  See, http://www.twc.state.tx.us/crd/facts.html .  As stated by the TWCCRD, unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitutes sexual harassment when submission to or rejection of this conduct explicitly or implicitly affects an individual’s employment, unreasonably interferes with an individual’s work performance or creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment.

Whether unlawful sexual harassment creates a hostile work environment in Corpus Christi, Houston, San Antonio or elsewhere, sexual harassment victims may contact the EEOC and, in Texas, the TWCCRD, as well as an attorney or lawyer to determine if a sexual harassment class action lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential sex discrimination claim.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination.  During Fiscal Year 2008, the EEOC received 33,937 race discrimination charge filings, up 11% from the prior year.  The EEOC reports that race discrimination continues to be the most frequent allegation in annual charge filings with the EEOC nationwide.  Further information about the EEOC is available in the agency’s website at www.eeoc.gov .

On May 29, 2009, the EEOC issued a Press Release announcing that an Illinois construction company will pay $630,000.00 and provide significant remedial relief to settle a race discrimination class action lawsuit in which EEOC attorneys charged that the construction company fired a class of black employees because of their race and retaliated against an employee after it discovered he had filed a lawsuit against another employer for race discrimination.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/5-29-09.html .  Acting EEOC Chairman Stuart Ishimaru was quoted in the Press Release as saying that “No group of employees should ever be targeted for layoffs based on race, and the EEOC will vigorously prosecute systemic race discrimination cases.” 

In Texas, the Texas Workforce Commission Civil Rights Division (”TWCCRD”) enforces the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act; which has been codified into Texas Labor Code, Chapter 21.  According to the TWCCRD “Employment Discrimination Fact Sheets,” Chapter 21 of the Texas Labor Code and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protect individuals against employment discrimination on the basis of race and color.  See, http://www.twc.state.tx.us/crd/facts.html .  In this regard, it is unlawful to discriminate against or harass any employee or applicant because of race or color.

Whether employment related race discrimination and retaliation for opposing workplace race discrimination occurs in Dallas, Houston, Port Arthur or elsewhere, victims of group race discrimination may contact the EEOC and, in Texas, the TWCCRD, as well as an attorney or lawyer to determine if a race discrimination and retaliation class action lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential employment discrimination claim.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) enforces federal laws which prohibit employment discrimination.  In an April 8, 2009 EEOC Press Release, the federal agency announced filing of an employment discrimination lawsuit against a Memphis unit of a Houston based concrete supplier.  According to the EEOC Press Release, EEOC attorneys claim in the lawsuit that the company violated federal law by allegedly refusing to place a worker into a sales job because of his national origin, Asian, and age, subjecting him to harassment and retaliating against him for opposing that unlawful conduct.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/4-8-09b.html .  As stated in the Press Release, this alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment decisions and harassment based on national origin and retaliation against those who complain about it.  Further information about the EEOC is available in its website at www.eeoc.gov .

Whether employment discrimination against people of Asian descent occurs in Corpus Christi, Galveston, Houston or elsewhere, Asian victims of unlawful harassment, discrimination and retaliation may contact the EEOC and an attorney or lawyer to determine if an Asian discrimination lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential employment discrimination claim.

In an April 24, 2009 article by Jason Whitely at WFAA.com entitled “DFR To Face Second Sexual Harassment Lawsuit,” the Dallas and Fort Worth news station reports that Dallas Fire-Rescue faces more explosive allegations of sexual harassment against female employees in a lawsuit filed by an attorney on behalf of a victim.  See, http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/wfaa/latestnews/stories/wfaa090423_mo_.10514 .  According to the news report, this sexual harassment lawsuit involving Dallas Fire-Rescue is the second DFR faces over sexual harassment.  As stated in the article, the Dallas City Council has approved hiring an independent investigator to look into sexual harassment issues.  A Dallas City Attorney would not address the harassment allegations, but the alleged sexual harassment victim’s attorney was quoted in the article as saying that “This isn’t a priority despite Chief [Eddie] Burn’s public promise to the citizens.”

In Texas, the Texas Workforce Commission Civil Rights Division (”TWCCRD”) enforces the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act; which has been codified into Texas Labor Code, Chapter 21.  Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Chapter 21 of the Texas Labor Code and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  According to the TWCCRD “Employment Discrimination Fact Sheets” found at http://www.twc.state.tx.us/crd/facts.html , unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitutes sexual harassment when submission to or rejection of this conduct explicitly or implicitly affects an individual’s employment, unreasonably interferes with an individual’s work performance or creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment.  For its own part, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, including sexual harassment.  Further information about the EEOC may be found in the federal agency’s website at www.eeoc.gov .

Whether workplace sexual harassment occurs in Dallas, Fort Worth, Lubbock or elsewhere in Texas, victims of sexual employment discrimination may contact the TWCCRD and the EEOC, as well as a Texas attorney or lawyer to determine if a sexual harassment lawsuit may ulitmately be appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential sexual harassment claim.

In a May 27, 2009 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) Press Release, the federal agency announced that a New York drug store chain will pay $240,000.00 and furnish other substantial relief to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit in which the EEOC alleged that the company unlawfully created, maintained and failed to remedy a hostile work environment by subjecting several female employees to sex and pregnancy harassment.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/5-27-09.html .  According to the Press Release, the EEOC charged that a store manager frequently made vulgar comments about women’s private parts, sexually propositioned female employees, made lewd remarks about their pregnancies and bodies, assigned unfavorable job duties to pregnant employees and repeatedly grabbed female employees, including grabbing their buttocks.  Further, the EEOC said, the employees who complained and filed discrimination charges with the agency were retaliated against by being subjected to further harassment by their supervisors.  An EEOC trial attorney was quoted in the Press Release as saying that “Employers have a duty to maintain a work environment that is free from sexual harassment and retaliation - it’s really that simple.”

Harassment because of a person’s sex or due to her pregnancy and retaliation for complaining about it violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination.  Further information about the EEOC is available in the federal agency’s website located at www.eeoc.gov . 

Whether workplace harassment, discrimination and retaliation occurs in Amarillo, Dallas, Houston or elsewhere, victims of unlawful employer harassment or retaliation may contact the EEOC and an attorney to determine if a hostile work environment and retaliation lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential harassment claim.

In an April 22, 2009 U. S. Department of Justice (”DOJ”) Press Release, the DOJ announced that a former Bexar County Sheriff’s deputy pleaded guilty to a civil rights charge in a San Antonio federal court for using excessive force while working as a detention officer at the county jail.  According to court documents cited by the Press Release, the former deputy acknowledged that he willfully used more force than was necessary when he responded to noisy prisoners inside of a locked holding cell by entering the cell and striking a pretrial detainee.  See, http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/2009/April/09-crt-380.html .  As stated in the DOJ Press Release, the prisoner sustained injuries to his head that necessitated medical treatment as a result of the assault.  By pleading guilty, the former deputy acknowledged that he deprived the prisoner of his constitutional right not to be deprived of liberty without due process, which includes the right to be free from the use of excessive force by a law enforcement officer.  An attorney was quoted in the Press Release as saying that “Law enforcement officers take an oath to uphold the law, not to violate it, as this officer did when he abused his authority over a man in his custody.”

Whether law enforcement abuse of authority occurs in Corpus Christi, Houston, San Antonio or elsewhere in Texas, police misconduct victims may report civil rights violations to the DOJ and an officer’s employer, as well as an attorney or lawyer to determine if an excessive force charge or lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential police authority abuse claim.

In a May 26, 2009 U. S. Department of Justice (”DOJ”) Press Release, the DOJ announced the filing of its thirteenth lawsuit this year alleging violations of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (”USERRA”).  According to the Press Release, the DOJ filed the USERRA lawsuit on behalf of a U. S. Naval Reserve member against Newark Public Schools (”NPS”), charging that the NPS did not promptly reemploy the reservist as a substitute teacher or otherwise place him in the position that he would have been in had his employment not been interrupted by military service.  As stated in the Press Release, the Labor Department’s Veterans’ Employment and Training Service investigated the matter, determined that the reservist’s claim had merit and, upon completion of conciliation efforts, referred the matter to the Justice Department.  See, http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2009/May/09-crt-510.html .

Whether employment discrimination against members of the armed forces occurs in Beaumont, Dallas, Fort Worth or elsewhere, service member victims of employment and reemployment leave discrimination may contact the DOJ Civil Rights Division and an attorney or lawyer to determine if a USERRA military leave lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential employment discrimination claim.

In a May 26, 2009 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) Press Release, the federal agency announced that a North Carolina lumber and hardware retailer will pay $80,000.00 and furnish other relief to settle a race discrimination and harassment lawsuit in which the EEOC charged that the company subjected a black worker to a racially hostile work environment, including explicit racial slurs as well as racial jokes and derogatory stereotypes about blacks.  See, http://eeoc.gov/press/5-26-09.html .  An EEOC attorney was quoted in the Press Release as saying that “We are pleased that the EEOC was able to resolve this case of egregious racial harassment.” 

The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination.  Further information about the EEOC is available in the agency’s website at www.eeoc.gov .  In Texas, the Texas Workforce Commission Civil Rights Division (”TWCCRD”) enforces the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act; which has been codified into Texas Labor Code, Chapter 21.  In this regard, Chapter 21 of the Texas Labor Code prohibits race discrimination and harassment in the workplace.  Further information from the TWCCRD about employment related race discrimination and harassment may be found in the TWCCRD’s “Employment Discrimination Fact Sheets” at http://www.twc.state.tx.us/crd/facts.html .

Whether racial harassment related to employment occurs in Dallas, Houston, San Antonio or elsewhere, employment discrimination victims may contact the EEOC and, in Texas, the TWCCRD, as well as an attorney or lawyer to determine if a hostile work environment lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential race harassment case.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination.  The Americans With Disabilities Act (”ADA”) protects employees and job applicants from discrimination based on perceived disabilities.  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 number of disability bias charges filed with the EEOC in 14 years.  See, www.eeoc.gov . 

In a May 22, 2009 EEOC Press Release, the federal agency announced filing of a disability discrimination lawsuit against a hospital in which the EEOC charges that the hospital unlawfully prohibited applicants and employees from working at its medical center if they were taking a legally prescribed narcotic medication.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/5-22-09b.html .  According to the EEOC Press Release, the lawsuit alleges that certain employees and applicants were denied hire or placed on unpaid leave because they were taking prescribed narcotic medications.  The EEOC contended that such action was taken because the healthcare facility perceived persons taking such narcotic medications as being disabled.  An EEOC attorney was quoted in the disability discrimination related Press Release as saying that “… the employer used a blanket policy to exclude employees from work just because they were taking certain legally prescribed narcotic medications [and] the ADA requires that employers make an individualized assessment of an applicant’s or employee’s ability to perform his or her specific job.”

Whether employment discrimination based on a perceived disability occurs in Beaumont, Houston, San Antonio or elsewhere, workplace victims of disability discrimination may contact the EEOC and an attorney or lawyer to determine if a disability bias lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential disability discrimination case.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination.  Age discrimination in the workplace violates the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.  During Fiscal Year 2008, age discrimination charges surged to a record high 24,582 - an increase of 29% from the prior fiscal year.  See, www.eeoc.gov .

In a May 22, 2009 EEOC Press Release, the federal agency charged in an age discrimination lawsuit that a Florida based restaurant and lounge violated federal law when it discriminated against older employees.  According to the Press Release, the EEOC lawsuit alleged that when the restaurant and lounge came under new management in 2007, the new managers stated they would “get rid of all the old and ugly people.”  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/5-22-09a.html .  As stated in the Press Release, older employees were told that there were too many old employees and they needed younger ones, so the restaurant began to cut older employees’ hours and wages, take away their responsibilities, assign them to undesirable shifts, and force them out or terminate them outright.  In addition, younger employees were allegedly hired to cover the more desirable shifts and replace the older workers.  In this regard, the EEOC’s lawsuit charged as well that a plaintiff and several other employees over 40 were subjected to a hostile work environment and disparate treatment.

Whether age discrimination in employment occurs in Beaumont, Houston, San Antonio or elsewhere, victims of age related hostile work conditions may contact the EEOC and an attorney or lawyer to determine if an age discrimination lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential age discrimination case.