The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) is a federal agency responsible for enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, including, for example, national origin discrimination.  In a posting at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/8-17-11b.cfm , the EEOC announced filing of a federal lawsuit against a Chinese fast food restaurant chain.  In the case, the EEOC charges that the restaurant chain violated federal law by treating Latino employees differently from Asian workers at one of its restaurants.  According to the EEOC Press Release, a general manager for a restaurant gave less desirable assignments to Hispanic workers, reduced their hours and held them to a different standard of performance.  More specifically, the EEOC lawsuit alleges that Hispanic workers who worked as counter help were required to clean the bathroom, tables and counters, while Asian workers were permitted to simply stand around and watch.  In addition, the EEOC found that the general manager disciplined Latino employees in a stricter, harsher and more frequent manner than Asian employees for similar infractions.

Discrimination based on national origin violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  EEOC attorneys filed the lawsuit after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through the agency’s conciliation process.  The lawsuit seeks monetary damages on behalf of Hispanic workers, training on anti-discrimination laws, posting of notices at the workplace and other measures to prevent future discrimination.  In this regard, an EEOC attorney quoted in the Press Release said, in part, as follows:  “Favoring employees of one ethnicity over another is not only illegal but undermines the benefits of a diverse work force.”

Whether Hispanic or Latino employees are subjected to workplace discrimination in Corpus Christi, Houston, San Antonio or elsewhere, impacted employees may consult the EEOC or an attorney to determine whether a national origin discrimination lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential discrimination case.

One of the world’s largest security firms violated federal law when it failed to stop co-worker harassment of a security guard, the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit announced in a Press Release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/6-28-11a.cfm .  According to the EEOC, a security guard of East Indian national origin faced constant harassment, including national origin and age related harassment.  In its lawsuit, the EEOC contends that the guard was repeatedly ridiculed about his accent and his turban.  The guard made complaints to supervisors but the company took no action to address the harassment, and, instead, transferred the guard involuntarily, which ultimately led to a reduction of work hours and benefits.  Ultimately, the guard resigned. 

Federal law prohibits employment discrimination, including national origin harassment, and the EEOC is a federal agency responsible for enforcing federal laws prohibiting workplace harassment.  Additional information about the EEOC is available at www.eeoc.gov .

Whether accent harassment in the workplace occurs in Conroe, Dallas or Houston, employees subjected to workplace ridicule and intimidation based upon their national origin accent may contact the EEOC and an attorney to determine if an employment discrimination charge is appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential accent harassment claim.

An investigation by the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) revealed that employees of a roofing company were frequently subjected to racial epithets, racial jokes and hostile treatment by other company employees, according to an EEOC June 7, 2011 Press Release posted by the EEOC at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/6-7-11b.cfm .  The EEOC said the harassment was largely perpetrated by supervisors working at the northwest Minnesota commercial, industrial and residential roofing company, adding that, despite complaints to senior company management, the workplace misconduct did not stop. 

In this regard, the EEOC is a federal agency responsible for enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, including racial harassment and retaliation for reporting racial harassment.  Following an investigation of the discrimination charge, the EEOC determined that there was reasonable cause to believe the roofing company violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  In addition, the EEOC found that the roofing company retaliated against the employee who brought the initial discrimination complaint by firing him after he reported the unlawful mistreatment.

As a result of the charge and the EEOC investigation, the roofing company agreed to pay $71,500 to seven black, Hispanic and American Indian employees to settle the racial harassment and retaliation charges.  In addition, the EEOC said the roofing company will provide other relief, including ant-discrimination training to employees and additional training to all supervsiors, managers and owners.

Whether unlawful workplace harassment and retaliation based on race or national origin occurs in Beaumont, Conroe, Houston or elsewhere, employees subjected to a racially hostile work environment may contact the EEOC or an attorney to determine if an employment discrimination charge or lawsuit is appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential harassment claim.  More information about the EEOC and the laws it enforces is available at www.eeoc.gov .

Attorneys with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) announced in a news release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/4-22-10.cfm that a Houston area construction company will pay $122,500 and provide additional remedial relief to resolve an employment discrimination lawsuit filed on behalf of fourteen company employees.  According to the April 22, 2010 news release, EEOC attorneys charged in the lawsuit that a supervisor of an employee of Islamic faith and East Indian descent referred to the employee as “terrorist,” “Taliban,” “Osama,” and “Al-Qaeda.”  The EEOC alleged further that the same supervisor, as well as others in company management, regularly referred to African Americans as “n—–s” and to Hispanics as “f—–g Mexicans.”  An EEOC attorney quoted in the news release stated, in part, that “Employees have an absolute right to be free from discriminatory harassment in the workplace.”

In this regard, the EEOC is a federal agency which enforces federal laws that prohibit employment discrimination, and EEOC attorneys filed the race, religious and national origin discrimination lawsuit in the Houston Division of the Southern District of Texas.  Further information about the EEOC and the laws it enforces is available in the agency’s website at www.eeoc.gov . 

Whether employment related harassment based on race, religion or national origin discrimination occurs in Houston or elsewhere, victims of discriminatory workplace practices may contact the EEOC and an attorney to determine if an employment discrimination lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential unlawful harassment claim.

The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, announced in a March 30, 2010 press release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/3-30-10a.cfm that a baking company will pay $350,000 to settle a national origin harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by EEOC attorneys in Illinois.  According to the agency press release, EEOC attorneys charged that the company tolerated harassment of employees of Mexican national origin by a manager at its Aurora, Illinois facility, and, when a number of those employees complained about the harassment, the manager retaliated against them by subjecting them to further verbal harassment, long hours, and harsher working conditions.  The EEOC sought relief for a class of seven employees, four of whom intervened in the lawsuit as plaintiffs.  In this regard, the EEOC lawsuit was brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits national origin discrimination and retaliation in employment.  An EEOC attorney quoted in the press release said, in part, that “The derogatory language and other harassment directed at the employees in this case are entirely inappropriate in the workplace.”

Further information about the EEOC and the federal laws it enforces regarding employment discrimination may be found at www.eeoc.gov .

Whether workplace harassment directed at workers of Mexican national origin occurs in Beaumont, Conroe, Houston or elsewhere, victims may contact the EEOC and an attorney to determine if an employment discrimination lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential harassment case.

A Houston based concrete company will pay $135,000 to settle a national origin, age and retaliation lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against its Memphis subsidiary, according to an EEOC press release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/3-11-10b.cfm .  As stated in the press release, EEOC lawyers charged in the employment discrimination lawsuit that company officials harassed and discriminated against a Thai-American employee because of his East Asian national origin and age.  The sales technician was allegedly called “J-p” even though he is of Thai ancestry.  In addition, the EEOC contended that the employee was subjected to insensitive ageist comments and then removed from the sales department and demoted to a driver job because of his age and national origin.  After complaining about the discrimination, he was further harassed, including being assigned to defective trucks, and repeatedly threatened with firing.  Moreover, after the company moved him out of sales, it hired two unqualified white men into that department, without an application process that would have given him the chance to apply for the positions.  The EEOC asserted that the Thai-American employee ultimately resigned when the work environment became too hostile to endure. 

Such alleged misconduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as well as the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.  In this regard, the EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination.  Further information about the EEOC is available at www.eeoc.gov .

Whether hostile workplace discrimination occurs in Beaumont, Conroe, Houston or elsewhere, victims may contact the EEOC and a lawyer to determine if an employment discrimination lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential harassment claim.

The U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination.  In a February 3, 2010 press release found on the internet at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/2-3-10c.cfm , EEOC attorneys announced two settlements against a hotel operator for $500,000 and signficant remedial relief in cases alleging national origin discrimination and sexual harassment.  Both lawsuits were filed in September 2007 under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

In the first lawsuit, EEOC attorneys charged that non-Chinese banquet servers were rejected for hire based on their national origin when a San Gabriel Hilton severed its contract and hired Landwin Management, a hotel operator, to operate the establishment in April 2005.  The EEOC claimed that all the non-Chinese banquet servers who previously worked for the hotel at the time, many of whom were Latino, were not hired back during the turnover and were instead replaced with less qualified Chinese workers.

In the second lawsuit, EEOC attorneys charged that the Hotel subjected female employees to a sexually hostile work environment, including verbal sexual harassment by the housekeeping supervisor, who referred to the women as “whores” and “prostitutes” in addition to other offensive language.  The supervisor also allegedly reprimanded the female employees if they even spoke to men, and the operator failed to respond to the employees’ complaints of harassment.

An EEOC attorney involved in the employment discrimination lawsuit commented that “The days when employers make decisions based on stereotypes and assumptions shaped by the race or national origin of their employees should be far behind us.”  Further information about the EEOC and the laws it enforces is available at www.eeoc.gov .

Whether unlawful employment discrimination occurs in Beaumont, Conroe, Houston or elsewhere, employment discrimination victims may contact the EEOC and an attorney to determine if an employment discrimination lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential unlawful workplace discrimination claim.

United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) attorneys announced settlement of an employment discrimination lawsuit against Albertsons, LLC, a national grocery store chain, according to a December 2009 EEOC press release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/12-15-09,cfm .  As stated in the press release, Albertsons, LLC will pay $8.9 million and furnish other relief to settle three employment discrimination lawsuits in which EEOC attorneys charged the company with race, color, and national origin discrimination and retaliation at its Aurora, Colorado distribution center.  The monetary relief will be distributed among 168 former and current employees.

The first lawsuit was filed in 2006 and alleged a pattern or practice of workplace harassment and discrimination based on race, color and national origin.  According to that lawsuit, minority employees were repeatedly subjected to derogatory comments and graffiti, including racial and ethnic slurs, depictions of lynchings, swastikas, and white supremacist and anti-immigrant statements.  Some of the graffiti allegedly remained for years until the restroom was remodeled in 2005.  In the second lawsuit, EEOC attorneys alleged a pattern or practice of retaliation.  A third lawsuit filed in 2008 claimed race discrimination on behalf of a single African American employee at the distribution center who was fired.

An EEOC attorney quoted in the press release said that the graffiti was particularly shocking.  In addition, the attorney commented as follows: “These cases presented the EEOC with some of the most egregious examples of race, color, and national origin discrimination the agency has seen in years.”  In this regard, the EEOC is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, including discrimination based upon race, color and national origin.  Further information about the EEOC may be found at www.eeoc.gov . 

Whether race, color and national origin employment discrimination and retaliation occurs in Conroe, Houston, Texas City or elsewhere, victims of workplace harassment may contact the EEOC and an attorney to determine if a workplace harassment lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential employment discrimination claim.

The United States Department of Justice (”DOJ”) announced in an October 13, 2009 Press Release at http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2009/October/09-crt-1102.html that a Louisiana man pleaded guilty to firing three shots from a shotgun at the home of three Hispanic men and, after they fled, entering the home and setting a fire that burned it to the ground.  The incident occurred in a rural area of western Louisiana, and the man and his victims lived across the street from one another.  According to the Press Release, the man admitted that his crime was motivated by the victims’ race and national origin and was intended to interfere with their right to live in their home.  Sentencing is scheduled for January 13, 2010.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (”EEOC”) Dallas District Office announced in a Press Release at http://www.eeoc.gov/press/9-30-09h.html that a Midland, Texas company will pay $125,000.00 to three former employees to settle a racial and national origin harassment lawsuit filed by EEOC attorneys.  According to the September 30, 2009 EEOC Press Release, agency attorneys filed the harassment lawsuit in a Midland Odessa federal court alleging that the company subjected three white, non-Hispanic employees to a hostile environment.  As stated in the Press Release, EEOC attorneys charged in the discrimination case that the men were subjected to name calling in English and Spanish on the jobsite and when they complained about the harassment, no action was taken.  An EEOC attorney quoted in the Press Release said that “Here, it was a Hispanic supervisor and co-workers who subjected non-Hispanics to derogatory comments because of their race.”  In this regard, race and national origin discrimination violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the EEOC is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, including discrimination based on race and national origin.  Further information about the EEOC is available in the agency’s website at www.eeoc.gov . 

Whether employment related race and national origin discrimination occurs in Dallas, Midland, Odessa or elsewhere, workplace discrimination victims may contact the EEOC and an attorney to determine if an employment discrimination lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential harassment discrimination claim.