United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) lawyers charged in a sexual harassment lawsuit that a nationwide restaurant chain knew about and tolerated repeated sexual assaults against six male employees by a group of male kitchen staffers, according to a November 10, 2009 EEOC Press Release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/11-10-09.cfm .  As stated in the Press Release, the restaurant chain will pay $345,000.00 and furnish other relief to settle the sexual harassment lawsuit in which allegations included claims that the men suffered sexually abusive behavior and were subjected to sexually charged comments, as well as offensive physical contact.  EEOC lawyers contended in the suit that complaints were made to virtually every manager at the restaurant, but they never put a stop to it and one victim finally had to call the police.  The company, however, denied the allegations.

Sexual harassment in the workplace violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the EEOC is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, including sex discrimination and sexual harassment.  EEOC lawyers filed the sexual harassment lawsuit against the restaurant chain after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement.  An EEOC lawyer quoted in the Press Release stated that “The evidence was claer, and everyone knew about it.” 

Whether employment related same sex sexual harassment occurs in Dallas, Galveston, or Houston restaurants, victims of workplace sexual harassment in the restaurant industry may contact the EEOC and a lawyer to determine if an employment discrimination lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential employment harassment claim.

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act prohibits employment discrimination because of age, and the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, including workplace age bias.  Employees and applicants 40 years of age and older are protected under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.  In 2008, age discrimination charges received by the EEOC totaled 24,582, representing a 28.7 percent increase over 2007.

In a November Press Release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/11-13-09.cfm , EEOC lawyers announced that a credit union company agreed to pay $57,250.00 to settle an EEOC age discrimination lawsuit.  According to the EEOC Press Release, a 61-year-old teller claimed in the case that she was fired in October 2003 because of her age.  An EEOC lawyer quoted in the lawsuit Press Release stated, in part, that statistics show age discrimination remains a serious issue across the country.  Further information about the EEOC is available at www.eeoc.gov . 

Whether workplace age bias takes place in Beaumont, Galveston, Houston or elsewhere, victims of age discrimination in employment may contact the EEOC and a lawyer to determine if an age discrimination lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential age bias claim.

Lawyers with the United States Department of Justice (”DOJ”) Civil Rights Division announced in a Press Release at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2009/November/09-crt-1221.html that a former Jackson County, Missouri sheriff’s deputy has pleaded guilty in federal court to violating the civil rights of a teenage girl whom he sexually assaulted in his patrol car.  According to the DOJ’s November 12, 2009 Press Release, the former sheriff’s deputy admitted, as a part of his plea, that while he was a deputy sheriff with the Jackson County Sheriff’s Department, he deprived a 15-year-old girl of her Constitutional rights by sexually assaulting her while she was in his custody.  A DOJ Civil Rights Division lawyer quoted in the Press Release commented that “A law enforcement officer who abuses his authority by sexually assaulting a child not only violates the law, but also the child’s civil rights and the public trust.”  The Civil Rights Division lawyer added that the DOJ will aggressively prosecute violations of Constitutional rights.

Sexual harassment violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, including workplace sexual harassment.  Acting EEOC Chairman Stuart Ishimaru has stated that “Sexual harassment is always unacceptable, but when some of the victims are vulnerable teenagers, it is especially unconscionable.”  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/11-03-09.cfm .  In this regard, EEOC lawyers have filed and pursued sexual harassment lawsuits involving teenagers employed at restaurants. 

According to a November 3, 2009 Press Release, EEOC lawyers announced that Ruby Tuesday, Inc. will pay $255,000.00 and furnish important equitable relief to settle a federal sexual harassment lawsuit.  As stated in the Press Release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/11-03-09.cfm , EEOC lawyers charged in the case that a restaurant general manager subjected female employees, some of whom were teenagers, to unlawful sexual harassment, including crude sexual propositions, lewd comments and graphic remarks.  More recently, EEOC lawyers announced in a November 23, 2009 Press Release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/11-23-09.cfm that a federal jury in Milwaukee returned a $105,000.00 verdict following a four day sexual harassment trial in a sexual harassment case brought by the EEOC against an IHOP restaurant in Racine, Wisconsin.  In that case, EEOC lawyers alleged that two teenage server employees were sexually harassed by their assistant manager, who subjected them to sexual propositions, groping and hair pulling.  As described in the EEOC Press Release, the jury found that the IHOP had acted recklessly with respect to one of the servers and awarded her $100,000.00 in punitive damages.  An EEOC lawyer quoted in the Press Release said “It’s never easy to stand up in the face o[f] harassment, especially if you’re young and you really need your job.”  The EEOC lawyer added that “But these women did that, and because of them and this case, women will have more equal opportunity while working at IHOP and elsewhere in the restaurant industry in Wisconsin.” 

Further information about the EEOC and the federal laws enforced by the federal agency is available in the EEOC’s website at www.eeoc.gov .

Whether teenage sexual harassment in the restaurant industry occurs in Dallas, Houston, San Antonio or elsewhere, teenage victims of workplace sex discrimination may contact the EEOC and a lawyer to determine if a sexual harassment lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the specific facts and circumstances of the potential restaurant employment discrimination claim.

Religious harassment violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, including religious harassment in the workplace.  In this regard, EEOC lawyers announced in a Press Release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/11-2-09a.cfm that the EEOC has filed a federal religious discrimination lawsuit against a staffing company which provides cable service in the Baltimore metropolitan area.  According to the November 2, 2009 Press Release, EEOC lawyers contend in the lawsuit that a Florida company and a Texas company subjected two employees to physical and verbal harassment because of their religion, Judaism.  As further stated in the Press Release, EEOC lawyers assert that beginning in September 2005 and continuing throughout their employment, both employees were called “Dirty Jew,” “Dumb Jew,” and other anti-Semitic slurs against Jews by managers and coworkers.  Moreover, the religious harassment continued for a couple of years, the EEOC said, and included the defacing of one employee’s work vehicle with a swastika symbol and physical harassment in which the employee was allegedly forced into a trash bin for the amusement of managers who observed them on a work surveillance camera and called it “throw the Jew in the dumpster.”  An EEOC lawyer was quoted in the Press Release as saying “Employers must take steps to prevent religious harassment of their employees [and] we brought this lawsuit to remind employers of their legal responsibility to prevent and promptly correct this type of conduct.” 

Religious discrimination charge filings with the EEOC nationwide totaled 3,273 in Fiscal Year 2008, up 11.4 percent from the prior year and the highest level in the past decade.  Further information about the EEOC and the laws it enforces can be found at www.eeoc.gov .   

Whether a hostile work environment based on religious harassment occurs in Texas or elsewhere, victims of workplace religious harassment may contact the EEOC and a lawyer to determine if a religious discrimination lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential employment discrimination claim.

In a case investigated by the San Antonio Division of the FBI with assistance from the Bexar County Sheriff’s Office, lawyers with the United States Department of Justice (”DOJ”) announced in a DOJ Press Release at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2009/November/09-crt-1244.html that a Bexar County, Texas Corrections Officer has been charged in a four count federal indictment with violating the civil rights of two detainees and obstructing justice.  According to the November 17, 2009 Press Release, trial lawyers with the DOJ Civil Rights Division contend that the charges stem from two December 2004 incidents in which the Bexar County Corrections Officer from San Antonio allegedly assaulted inmates at the Bexar County Detention Center by kicking and striking them.  As stated in the DOJ Press Release, the indictment also charges the Corrections Officer with obstructing justice by providing false statements about the assaults.  In this regard, an indictment is a formal accusation of criminal conduct, not evidence of guilt, so a defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.  If convicted on the civil rights charges, the defendant faces a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment on each civil rights charge and 20 years imprisonment on each obstruction charge.

Lawyers with the United States Department of Justice (”DOJ”) Civil Rights Division announced in a Press Release at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2009/November/09-crt-1202.html that an Arkansas man has been sentenced in a Fort Smith, Arkansas federal court on federal civil rights charges related to a conspiracy to drive a woman and her children from their home because they associated with African Americans.  According to the November 6, 2009 DOJ Press Release, the man was sentenced to 12 months and one day in prison, three years of post-incarceration supervision, a fine of $5,000, and a $200 special assessment.  The man’s co-conspirators pleaded guilty in September 2009 for their roles in the conspiracy.  Special agents for the FBI’s Little Rock Office investigated the case.

Lawyers for the United States Department of Justice (”DOJ”) announced in a November 5, 2009 Press Release at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2009/November/09-crt-1197.html that the United States reached a settlement that will resolve its lawsuit filed on behalf of a retired Army service member against Knight Protective Service Inc.  According to the DOJ Press Release, lawyers alleged in the complaint that the company willfully violated the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (”USERRA”) by failing to promptly and properly reemploy the retired Army service member upon his return from active military duty in the position he would have held had his employment not been interrupted by his military service.  As stated in the Press Release, the company must pay $7,839.61 in compensation.  The DOJ’s Civil Rights Division has given a high priority to the enforcement of service members’ rights under USERRA.  During 2009, the Civil Rights Division has filed 21 USERRA lawsuits on behalf of service members.

Lawyers with the United States Department of Justice (”DOJ”) announced in a November 4, 2009 Press Release at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2009/November/09-crt-1190.html that a Judge has sentenced a former law enforcement officer with the Memphis, Tennessee Police Department to 27 months in prison and one year of supervised release after the former law enforcement officer pleaded guilty to stealing money from motorists while acting under the color of law.  According to the DOJ Press Release, the former officer admitted that he surreptitiously stole cash from three Hispanic drivers he pulled over while on duty as a Memphis police officer.  As stated in the DOJ Press Release, he ordered the victims out of their vehicles, patted them down and removed personal items from them during the search.  He then stole money from the victims before returning their personal items and releasing them.  A DOJ lawyer quoted in the Press Release stated that ” We place in police officers a great deal of trust, and the Civil Rights Division will aggressively prosecute those officers who violate the rights of others, and the public trust, for personal gain.”  This case was investigated by the FBI and the Memphis Police Department.

Employment related race discrimination violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, including race discrimination.  In an October 22, 2009 EEOC Press Release at http://www.eeoc.gov/press/10-22-09.html , agency lawyers announced that an auto parts supplier agreed to resolve a race discrimination case by paying $105,000.00 and conducting annual training of its managers and supervisors on race discrimination.  According to the Press Release, EEOC lawyers contended that the company subjected an African American worker to discrimination by failing to promote him to a maintenance position because of his race.