Minority car dealers are expected to be hit hard as General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC trim their retail networks, undoing years of work by the auto makers to bring more African-Americans, Hispanics and others into the car business. Chrysler on Thursday said it would drop 789 of its 3,200 dealers as part of its bankruptcy restructuring. GM plans to eliminate 2,600 of its more than 6,000 dealers as it reorganizes.

The National Association of Minority Automobile Dealers estimates that 140 of Chrysler’s 170 to 175 minority-owned franchises could be closed, and at least 174 of GM’s 300 minority-owned dealers could shut their doors.

Michal Czerwonka for The Wall Street Journal

Sil Gonzales worried Chrysler would close his dealership in South Gate, Calif. The yellow markings list cars sold recently. The organization said Chrysler’s minority-owned dealerships are at risk because many are small stores that offer only one of the company’s three brands, Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep. Fewer than half have converted to the company’s “Genesis” format that puts all three makes under one roof, NAMAD said. That compares to the approximately 60% of all Chrysler dealerships that have the three-brand format.

Genesis stores are usually more profitable because they sell and service more vehicles than single-brand dealerships. Chrysler plans to emphasize Genesis dealerships under its reorganization. About 58% of the GM stores run by minority owners sell Pontiacs, Saturns, Saabs or Hummers, NAMAD said — all brands the company plans to phase out or sell.

“We’re more vulnerable,” said NAMAD President Damon Lester. “We were the last ones to come to the table.” Chrysler declined to comment. Dawin Wright, GM’s executive director of dealer development, said GM is trying to put in safety nets to help minority dealers survive. “We share their concern,” he said.

After years of losing market share, GM, Chrysler and Ford Motor Co. have been left with more dealers than they need, especially in metropolitan areas. As a result, their franchises often end up competing with each other for customers and many lose money.

Many minority dealers operate in cramped downtown locations that are less desirable than the spacious suburban auto malls that are now popular, said Mr. Lester and other dealers. Urban franchises typically draw fewer shoppers and carry less inventory for customers to choose among. Both factors tend to limit sales.

Minority dealers often don’t own the land beneath their showrooms, so the monthly rent adds to their costs, Mr. Lester said. And since many borrowed money to get into the business, they sometimes have more debt than family-run dealerships that have been in business for decades. Sil Gonzales, 57 years old, feared his Casa de Gonzales Chrysler-Jeep store in South Gate, Calif., a largely Latino suburb of Los Angeles, would be one of those Chrysler terminates.

When Houston Texas attorney spoke with former African American dealer, Mike Farr, Mr. Farr stated the fianancing for auto purchases makes it tough for the business.

As Chrysler’s troubles have mounted in the past year, his sales have plunged. He’s hoping to sell the six acres of land beneath his store to raise cash to pay off $14 million in debt. But on Thursday he learned from Chrysler that his dealership had been spared. “We were very fortunate,” Mr. Gonzales said.  “Now I’m just concerned for my fellow minority dealers.”

 On Wednesday, a delegation of about 100 dealers, including some minorities, gathered in Washington to lobby Congress to save dealerships from closure. Dealers from Houston traveled as well to Washington.  On Thursday, representatives of the National Auto Dealers Association, along with NAMAD, were scheduled to meet with the White House’s automotive task force, according to an NADA spokesman.

The Big Three car makers first set up programs to help minority and women entrepreneurs get into the dealer business back in the 1970s and ’80s. The idea was both to increase diversity among their retail networks and do a better job appealing to the growing ranks of minority consumers.

Greg Baranco, an African-American, owns a Buick-Pontiac-GMC store in Atlanta and a Mercedes-Benz dealership nearby. He’s been in the business 30 years, but said he has watched how his Pontiac sales plunged after GM announced earlier this year the brand would be eliminated. After selling 20 Pontiacs a month on average, he sold just four in April. Mr. Baranco worries how he will do carrying just GMC and Buick. “Dealers are finding it difficult to maintain those operations with just two brands,” he said.

By ALEX P. KELLOGG (Wallstreet Journal)—Kate Linebaugh contributed to this article.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, and, in Texas, the Texas Workforce Commission Civil Rights Division (”TWCCRD”) enforces the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act; which has been codified into Chapter 21 of the Texas Labor Code.  Together, 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 national origin, making it unlawful to discriminate against any employee or applicant because of the individual’s national origin.

In an April 14, 2009 EEOC Press Release, the federal agency announced that a group of nursing home companies will pay up to $450,000.00 and provide significant remedial relief to a class of Hispanic employees who were allegedly subjected to harassment, different terms and conditions of employment, promotion, compensation, and treatment through the implementation of an English-only rule that was enforced only against Hispanic workers.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/4-14-09.html .  According to the EEOC Press Release, the EEOC identified a total of 53 current and former Hispanic employees at facilities in California and Texas who were subjected to disparate treatment and harassment based on their national origin and shared Spanish language.  As further stated in the Press Release, the EEOC charged that some workers were prohibited from speaking Spanish to Spanish speaking residents of the facility, or disciplined for speaking Spanish in the parking lot while on breaks.  Additionally, the EEOC alleged in the lawsuit that defendants gave Hispanic employees less desirable work than non-Hispanic counterparts, paid them less, and promoted them less often.  The EEOC’s Acting Chairman, Stuart Ishimaru, was quoted in the Press Release as saying that “National origin discrimination is an abomination to our country, which was founded by immigrants and has prospered from welcoming immigrants.”

Further information about the EEOC may be found at www.eeoc.gov , and additional information about the TWCCRD may be located at http://www.twc.state.tx.us/crd/file_emp.html . 

Whether immigrant discrimination related to employment occurs in Corpus Christi, Houston, San Antonio or elsewhere, workplace victims of culture bias may contact the EEOC, and, in Texas, the TWCCRD, as well as an attorney or lawyer to determine if a national origin harassment and discrimination class action lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular circumstances and facts of the potential immigrant bias 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 a May 22, 2009 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) Press Release, the federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination announced that a construction company will pay $500,000 to settle a race and national origin discrimination lawsuit brought on behalf of ten (10) Hispanic workers.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/5-22-09.html .  According to the EEOC Press Release, the discrimination lawsuit charged that the company’s foremen and former superintendent would refer to the company’s Latino employees with derogatory terms such as “f—ing Mexicans,” “pork chop,” “Julio,” “spics,” “chico,” and “wetback.”  In addition, the Press Release stated that Hispanic workers were allegedly exposed to rascist graffiti on a routine basis and the company never addressed the rascist graffiti. 

Race and national origin discrimination violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  An EEOC trial attorney was quoted in the Press Release as saying that “This settlement is important vindication for those Hispanic employees who suffered harassment by their supervisors [and] the consent decree entered in this case will ensure that the company prevents harassment from taking place on its job sites.”  Further information about the EEOC is available on 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 and the Texas Labor Code prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color and national origin.  Further information about the TWCCRD and employment discrimination may be found in the TWCCRD’s “Employment Discrimination Fact Sheets” at http://www.twc.state.tx.us/crd/facts.html . 

Whether employment discrimination against Latino and Hispanic workers occurs in Corpus Christi, Houston, San Antonio or elsewhere, Latino victims of race harassment in the workplace may contact the EEOC and, in Texas, the TWCCRD, as well as an attorney or lawyer to determine if a national origin and race harassment lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential discrimination claim.

According to a report released by the Southern Poverty Law Center, low-income Latino immigrants in the South are routinely the targets of wage theft, racial profiling and other abuses driven by an anti-immigrant climate that harms all Latinos regardless of their immigration status.  The Southern Poverty Law Center report is entitled “Under Siege: Life For Low-Income Latinos In The South” and, according to a SPLC Press Release, it documents the experiences of Latino immigrants who face increasing hostility as they fill low-wage jobs in Southern states that had few Latino residents until recent years.  As stated in the Press Release, the report is based on a survey of 500 low-income Latinos - including legal residents, undocumented immigrants and U.S. citizens - at five locations in the South, including Nashville, Charlotte, New Orleans, rural southern Georgia, and several towns and cities in northern Alabama.  According to the Press Release, a number of immigrants in the survey described the South as a war zone, and the report’s author was quoted as saying that workplace abuses and racial profiling are rampant in the South.  Discrimination against Latinos in the region constitutes a civil rights crisis that must be addressed, the SPLC report says, and the report concludes that comprehensive immigration reform is the only realistic, fair and humane solution.  For further information see http://www.splcenter.org/news/item.jsp?aid=375 or contact the Southern Poverty Law Center at 400 Washington Ave., Montgomery, Alabama 36104.

As outlined by the Texas Workforce Commission at http://www.twc.state.tx.us/crd/facts.html , 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 national origin as well as race and color.  According to the Texas Workforce Commission (”TWC”), it is unlawful to discriminate against any employee or applicant because of the individual’s national origin, and no one can be denied equal employment opportunity because of birthplace, ancestry, culture, or linguistic characteristics common to a specific ethnic group.  Further, the TWC reports that equal employment opportunity cannot be denied because of marriage or association with persons of a national origin group; membership or association with specific ethnic promotion groups; attendance or participation in schools, churches, temples, or mosques generally associated with a national origin group; or a surname associated with a national origin group.  Moreover, a rule requiring employees to speak only English at all times on the job may violate Title VII, unless the employer shows it is necessary for conducting business. In addition, the TWC states that the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (”IRCA”) prohibits discrimination based on national origin or citizenship.

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

The Texas Workforce Commission (”TWC”) provides to the public at its website “Employment Discrimination Fact Sheets” which include general information about immigration related practices which may be considered discriminatory.  See, http://www.twc.state.tx.us/crd/facts.html .  In this regard, the TWC reports that the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (”IRCA”) requires employers to prove that all employees hired after November 6, 1986, are legally authorized to work in the United States.  However, the IRCA also prohibits discrimination based on national origin and citizenship, according to the TWC.  As stated by the TWC in its Fact Sheets, an employer who singles out individuals of a particular national origin or individuals who appear to be foreign to provide employment verification may have violated both the IRCA and Title VII.   Employers who impose citizenship requirements or give preference to U.S. citizens in hiring or employment opportunities may have violated the IRCA, unless these are legal or contractual requirements for particular jobs, and employers may have also violated Title VII if a requirement or preference has the purpose of or effect of discriminating against individuals of a particular national origin, according to the TWC.

Whether citizenship discrimination in the workplace occurs in Beaumont, Houston or elsewhere in Texas, victims of immigration discrimination may contact the TWC Civil Rights Division at (512)463-2642 or an attorney to determine if an immigration or citizenship discrimination lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential immigration discrimination claim.

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 national origin, making it unlawful to discriminate against any employee or applicant because of the individual’s national origin, according to the Texas Workforce Commission “Facts About National Origin Discrimination” at http://www.twc.state.tx.us/crd/facts.html .  No one can be denied equal employment opportunity because of birthplace, ancestry, culture or linguistic characteristics common to a specific ethnic group, and equal employment opportunity cannot be denied because of marriage or association with persons of a national origin group; membership or association with specific ethnic promotion groups; attendance in schools, churches, temples or mosques generally associated with a national origin group; or a surname associated with a national origin group.

As stated in the Texas Workforce Commission “Employment Discrimination Fact Sheets,” a rule requiring employees to speak only English at all times on the job may violate Title VII, unless an employer shows it is necessary for conducting business.  If an employer believes the English-only rule is critical for business purposes, then the Texas Workforce Commission (”TWC”) says that employees have to be told when they must speak English and the consequences for violating the rule.  Any negative employment decision based on breaking the English-only rule will be considered evidence of discrimination if the employer did not tell employees of the rule, according to the TWC.

The TWC further reports that an employer must show a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for the denial of employment opportunity because of an individual’s accent or manner of speaking, and, in this regard, investigations will focus on the qualifications of the person and whether his or her accent or manner of speaking had a detrimental effect on job performance.  Requiring employees or applicants to be fluent in English may therefore violate Title VII if the rule is adopted to exclude individuals of a particular national origin and is not related to job performance. 

Whether national origin discrimination in the workplace occurs in Beaumont, Houston or elsewhere in Texas, victims of accent, ancestry and English only discrimination may contact the TWC Civil Rights Division at (512)463-2642 or an attorney to determine if an employment discrimination lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the specific facts and circumstances of the potential national origin discrimination claim.

On April 16, 2009, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) announced that the federal agency settled a harassment lawsuit against a national department store on behalf of ten (10) former employees.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/4-16-09a.html .  According to the Press Release, the EEOC had charged that the department store manager harassed Hispanic and Black employees based on their national origin, race and color, and retaliated against those who complained about the harassment.  The EEOC Press Release stated further that an alterations department manager complained that she “hate[d] Hispanics,” and that Hispanics were “lazy” and “ignorant” and that Hispanic tailors were chastised by the same alterations manager for speaking to each other in Spanish.  In addition, the Press Release referred to allegations that the same manager made other derogatory remarks such as “I don’t like blacks” and “you’re black, you stink.”  Moreover, the EEOC reported in the Press Release that the employees complained to the company about the harassment, but the harassment did not stop, and the alterations manager retaliated against those who complained by continuing the racially offensive comments, unfairly berating employees and citing them for alleged performance problems.

Whether racial and national origin discrimination in the workplace occurs in San Antonio, San Marcos or elsewhere, victims of employment related racial and national origin discrimination may contact the EEOC and an attorney to determine if a racial and national origin lawsuit may ultimately be appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential case.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Aenean at risus nec urna convallis cursus. Phasellus risus. Donec pretium ipsum sed libero. Sed vulputate ipsum. Fusce porttitor mi et lorem consequat pharetra. Vivamus orci quam, vehicula in, pulvinar id, blandit et, justo. Suspendisse dignissim dignissim enim. Sed nisl velit, tempus sed, condimentum ut, porta eu, ante. Aliquam eu velit eget libero porttitor dictum. Etiam egestas libero ac elit. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Phasellus velit ante, molestie accumsan, tempus eget, malesuada vitae, nulla. Nulla facilisi. Quisque ligula. Aenean tempus libero eu tellus. Vivamus at lacus. Cras elementum risus vel magna. Integer fermentum ultrices ipsum. Pellentesque mi leo, aliquam in, scelerisque vitae, interdum eget, dolor. Curabitur condimentum.

Here is a block quote …

Ut nisi est, malesuada eget, tincidunt consectetur, consectetur id, neque. Donec molestie fringilla massa. Integer a est id est aliquet mollis. Nulla facilisi. Integer suscipit odio eu diam. Vivamus tincidunt lectus ac neque. Proin ac eros. Donec eleifend. Cras tempor. Nam pellentesque, dolor ac condimentum convallis, ligula mauris adipiscing purus, ac bibendum augue nulla sit amet justo. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Quisque metus est, gravida nec, tincidunt nec, posuere sit amet, neque. Duis sodales. Phasellus pellentesque feugiat mi. Curabitur pharetra purus ac quam. Mauris quis felis. Aliquam eros odio, rhoncus elementum, blandit vel, commodo nec, mi. Donec ligula tortor, pretium quis, vulputate vitae, dignissim ut, tortor. Nulla facilisi. Sed elementum.

Quisque tincidunt. Duis lacus. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. In tristique felis eu felis. Integer euismod, lacus non accumsan aliquam, mauris dui luctus nulla, ac condimentum ipsum nisl eu enim. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Praesent ac lacus eget est commodo vestibulum. Ut consequat fringilla neque. Nam eget massa. Vivamus diam mauris, sodales at, ullamcorper id, iaculis vitae, dolor.

Pellentesque ut libero. Aenean semper nunc ut elit. Ut venenatis, lorem nec pretium facilisis, purus est sagittis mi, id molestie orci tortor vehicula ligula. In consectetur urna ut risus. Proin tincidunt tincidunt libero. Nullam convallis nunc sit amet libero. Fusce semper, risus quis adipiscing auctor, turpis velit mollis nisl, nec mollis sapien turpis eu elit. Aenean sollicitudin consectetur lectus. Integer vel lorem. Donec vehicula lacus ut quam. Duis nulla nisl, dapibus a, consectetur eu, rutrum sed, metus. Morbi tortor quam, tempus at, interdum at, commodo non, mauris. Fusce odio eros, vulputate sit amet, bibendum nec, hendrerit in, orci. Nulla lectus dolor, ultrices non, vehicula a, pharetra sed, nibh. Maecenas tincidunt, velit vel tempor pellentesque, nisi odio iaculis dolor, eget commodo augue nulla vitae metus. Nulla lacus.

Nulla eros mauris, lobortis at, pharetra ultricies, commodo a, elit. Curabitur eget libero at ante semper pulvinar. Cras non tellus. Morbi aliquam orci et dolor. Donec sodales mi nec tortor. Duis imperdiet ornare eros. Suspendisse sapien est, fermentum id, commodo in, eleifend id, dolor. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Curabitur at dui. Nunc rutrum, nulla vel commodo rhoncus, felis mauris bibendum magna, ac sodales felis orci eget libero. Donec fringilla erat nec ligula. Cras vel metus at ipsum pharetra facilisis. Aliquam ornare arcu at elit. Sed quis odio in leo ullamcorper placerat. Fusce eu orci. Suspendisse sit amet augue ut ante rhoncus placerat. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Integer eros orci, condimentum eu, ultricies non, vulputate et, quam. Nulla facilisi.