According to the Atlanta Business Chronicle, Cincinatti based Kroger Co. recently announced that the company settled a federal race discrimination lawsuit involving black employees in six states, including Georgia, for $16 million.  See, “Kroger Settles Discrimination Suit for $16M,” Atlanta Business Chronicle, http://www.bizjournals.com , 6/19/08.  Kroger is the No. 1 grocer in metro Atlanta.  Id.  The Atlanta publication reported that the lawsuit was originally filed in U.S. District Court in Louisville in 2001 on behalf of 12 black employees, who claimed they were passed over for promotions and paid less than white workers.  Id. 

Whether employment related race discrimination in promotions or pay occurs in Dallas, Houston or elsewhere, victims of racial discrimination at grocery store businesses may contact the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC) or an attorney to determine whether a formal complaint or charge of racial discrimination is appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the particular potential case.

On June 24, 2008, the Department of Justice issued a press release announcing that it had filed a federal court complaint against the City of Dallas, alleging that Dallas subjected an African American employee and former general laborer for the City to racial discrimination and retaliatory termination after the laborer reported to senior management the use of racial slurs by his immediate supervisor and - that same day - the City of Dallas fired him.  See, PRNewswire-USNewswire, “Justice Department Files Lawsuit Against City Of Dallas Alleging Race Discrimination and Retaliation,” U.S. Department of Justice, http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS216201+24-Jun-2008+PRN20080624 , 6/24/08.

“Title VII prohibits discrimination in employment and protects individuals from retaliation when they exercise their rights under the law,” said the Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.  Id. ”The Department is committed to enforcing all federal civil rights laws, including Title VII, under its jurisdiction.”  Id.  

Additional information about the Civil Rights Division is available on its website at www.usdoj.gov/crt/ .

Further, victims of employment related racial discrimination in Dallas or elsewhere may contact the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or an attorney to determine whether a formal charge of race discrimination in, for example, Dallas is appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the potential case. 

Whether race discrimination, including racially degrading comments, epithets or abusive language, occurs at workplaces in Baytown, Beaumont, Dallas, Houston or elsewhere, employment related racial discrimination is prohibited by law and victims of race discrimination may contact the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or an attorney to determine whether a formal charge of discrimination and a race discrimination lawsuit may be appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the potential employment discrimination case. 

In this regard, the United States Attorney’s Office and the U.S. Department of Justice have filed a federal lawsuit against the City of Fort Pierce alleging retaliation against a black code enforcement officer who complained that her superiors racially discriminated against her and three other black code enforcement officers.  See, Gardner, Keona, “Federal Lawsuit Alleges Racial Discrimination In Fort Pierce Filing,”  http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2008/aug/26/no-headline—26fsuit/ , 8/26/08.  The employee, who has been with the city for about 25 years, allegedly complained that the former director of building and code enforcement suggested that she “came from a monkey.”  Id.  A Justice Department news release alleges that the city ordered the plaintiff to work inside a “specially constructed, isolated cubicle” that was unlike any of her co-workers, and white co-workers openly joked about her “banishment to a cell.”  Id.  The federal lawsuit alleges that the city transferred her from “outside duty” of inspecting structures to “inside duty” such as handling data entry for other officers and that the new data entry position normally pays a lower salary than a code enforcement officer.  Id.

In May 2007, the city’s EEOC reportedly asked the city to participate in settlement discussions after finding there was “reasonable cause to believe” a violation of civil rights occurred as to the plaintiff and three other black workers.  Id.  The three other black workers have filed a separate, private lawsuit against the city.  Id.

In Houston and nationwide, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is receiving increasing quantities of inquiries about workplace law, employment related discrimination, as well as harassment complaints, and the number of discrimination-based workplace lawsuits has risen in Houston federal courts during the past few months compared with the same period last year, according to the Houston Chronicle.  Flood, Mary, “Job Bias Lawsuits On The Increase,” Houston Chronicle, 8/24/08, p. B1.  One Houston attorney cited in the article who defends businesses against discrimination complaints said he has seen an uptick in the number of discrimination cases and another Houston employment discrimination attorney said he has seen more age discrimination and medical leave complaints.  Id.

As reported by the Houston Chronicle, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reviews discrimination complaints and files some lawsuits itself while other discrimination cases may be filed by attorneys on behalf of victims and, in some cases, the victim represents themselves in their own case.  Id.

Discrimination charges are at their highest level in five years, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), and, in this regard, the EEOC reportedly received 82,000 private sector discrimination charges last year, noting that this is the highest volume of incoming charges since 2002 and the largest annual increase (9%) since the early 1990s.  See, Rosenberg, Richard, “Bias Charges Up Sharply As Settlements On The Rise,” San Fernando Valley Business Journal, http://www.entrepreneur.com , 7/21/08. Workplace retaliation claims were the second highest category behind race discrimination while pregnancy discrimination charges and sexual harassment, including sexual harassment charges by men, surged to record high levels.  Id.  According to the EEOC, it resolved a record number of charges through its internal mediation process, with more than 96% of the EEOC mediation participants, including employers, saying they were satisfied with that process.  Id.

One reason for the increase in complaints with the EEOC may be attributable, in part, to the EEOC’s online access, citizen meetings and other educational programs in which citizens are made aware of their rights and what steps they can take to protect their rights.  See, Flood, Mary, “Job Bias Lawsuits On The Rise,” Houston Chronicle, 8/24/08, p. B7.

In Houston,  inquiries about employment discrimination made to the EEOC between April 1, 2007 and August 17, 2007 totaled 2,338 and that number for the same period this year rose to 3,241.  Id.  However, the number of actual formal complaints filed in Houston has remained fairly static, according to the article in the Houston Chronicle.  Id.

Historically, race has been the charge most frequently filed since the EEOC became operational in 1965.  See, Rosenberg, Richard, “Bias Charges Up Sharply As Settlements On The Rise,” San Fernando Valley Business Journal, http://www.entrepreneur.com , 7/21/08. 

Whether workplace discrimination or retaliation occurs in Beaumont, Dallas, Houston or elsewhere, victims of bias may contact the EEOC or an attorney to discuss their rights.

An Orange, Texas newspaper has reported that a beauty supply chain based in Denton, Texas agreed recently to settle a race discrimination lawsuit filed in Beaumont by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against the business, Sally Beauty Supply, after an African American job seeker was allegedly denied a sales clerk position at the company’s location in West Orange.  See, “Sally Beauty To Pay Local Woman $30k For Discrimination,” http://www.orangeleader.com/homepage/local_story_176192538.html , 6/24/08.  As reported by the newspaper, the federal race discrimination lawsuit filed in Beaumont claimed that Sally Beauty Supply offered the plaintiff a job as a sales clerk with the company and even gave her a start date but rescinded the offer two days later.  Id.  In sworn testimony, a store manager said she was told by the district manager that “she did not want another black person working in the store,” according to the news article.  Id.  In addition, the plaintiff was reportedly “told on the day she arrived for work she could not be hired due to her race because too many African Americans were employed at the store.”  Id.  Sally Beauty Supply is to pay the plaintiff $30,000.00 to settle the race discrimination lawsuit.  Id.  As reported by The Orange Leader, the company’s website says “Sally Beauty is the world’s largest retailer of professional beauty supplies.”  Id.

Whether race discrimination in the workplace occurs in Beaumont, Houston, Orange or elsewhere, victims of employment discrimination may contact the EEOC to make a charge of racial discrimination and consult an attorney to determine whether a racial discrimination lawsuit may be appropriate in Beaumont, Houston, Orange or elsewhere under the facts and circumstances of the potential case.

Use of racially provocative and inappropriate language should not be acceptible in Galveston or elsewhere, and, as a recent article in The Galveston County Daily News says, “[t]here is never an appropriate time to use the N-word.”  See, Hollowell, Johnny, “No, The N-Word Is Not OK, Whoever Says It,” The Galveston County Daily News, http://www.galvestondailynews.com/story.lasso?ewcd=e227fdb1d4b081fa , 8/20/08.  Going further, the article states that some people in the African American community have adopted use of the word in their general vocabulary.  Id.  As stated in the article, it is not appropriate for one culture as opposed to another to use the word.  Id.  In short, the article urges all people to not use the N-word.  Id.

When racially insenstive language is used in the workplace it can evidence racial discrimination and racial employment discrimination is prohibited by federal law.  Victims of racial discrimination in the workplace may contact the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) about filing a charge of race related discrimination and victims may also contact an attorney to determine whether a racial discrimination lawsuit in Galveston or elsewhere may be appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the potential case.

According to a federal lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in Oregon, two employees of Video Only, Inc., a home entertainment and audio equipment company headquartered in Seattle, Washington, faced repeated slurs and jokes about their race, national origin, and religion, including use of the “N-word,” by management, telling of racially offensive jokes, use of the epithet “beaner,” and a hog-tied doll with its face painted black.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov/press/8-4-08.html , “Electronics Retailer ‘Video Only’ To Pay $630,000 For Harassment And Retaliation,” EEOC Press Release, 8/4/08.  In the lawsuit, the EEOC alleged that both employees were retaliated against after they reported the harassment.  Id.  In this regard, the EEOC asserted that the company confronted co-workers who supported the plaintiffs and hired a private investigator to gather information to discredit the harassment claims.  Id.  The alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and, according to the EEOC, the company settled the lawsuit this month, agreeing to pay $630,000 as well as implementing preventative measures.  Id.

In Broward County, Florida, a manager at a Davie apartment complex turned away African-American applicants, then tried to use the lack of black tenants to appeal to whites, according to a lawsuit filed Wednesday by the U.S. Justice Department. The lawsuit accuses C.F. Enterprises LLC and on-site apartment manager Don Murroni of discriminating against black people trying to rent at College Square Apartments in violation of the Fair Housing Act. Evidence was gathered through the department’s Operation Home Sweet Home initiative, where individuals pose as renters to identify possible discriminatory practices.  Susannah Bryan (South Florida Sun-Sentinel).

Murroni could not be reached for comment despite a call to the apartment complex at 6600 SW 39th St.  Craig Forman, Baco Raton-based president of D.F. Enterprises, could not be reached for comment depsite two calls.

The complaint alleges the defendants discouraged African-Americans from applying and offered to waive the application fee and other costs for white applicants only. The lawsuit, filed in Fort Lauderdale federal court, seeks an injunction against further discrimination, money damages for victims and civil penalties to be paid to the United States.  Marsha Ellison, Fort Lauderdale president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, said she hopes the lawsuit sends a message to other apartment managers who might try the same thing.

“It’s disappointing. However, it’s not surprising,” Ellison said of the allegations. “We would love to shut the doors of the NAACP, but this stuff goes on every single day, so we still exist.” On Wednesday, Mayor Tom Truex said the claims, if true, are no reflection on the town.

“The town of Davie has no tolerance for people who are discriminating based on race,” Truex said. “That kind of conduct has no place in Davie.”

The black population of Davie has stayed relatively stable since 2000, with about 3,400 residents who make up about 4 percent of the town’s population, census data show. In Broward County, the black population increased to 461,000 in 2007, or about 26 percent of the population. Davie has a long history of racial strife. Susannah Bryan(South Florida Sun-Sentinel).

The 2007-2008 Supreme Court term was a mixed blessing for the civil rights community, as the Court handed down decisions in crack cocaine sentencing guidelines, employment discrimination, voter ID laws, and execution by lethal injection.  Ardina Applebaum (Civilrights.org:http://www.civilrights.org/library/features/007-supreme-court-term-ends.)

Kathleen Sullivan, former dean of Stanford Law School and partner at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, LLP, told an audience at a July 1 American Constitution Society (ACS) event that the term could best be described as the “familiar ideological divide…but not every time.” 

This term, the Court made significant progress in the area of criminal justice reform with its 7-2 decision in Kimbrough v. United States.  In Kimbrough, the Court upheld the discretion of judges to depart from harsh federal sentencing guidelines for crack cocaine offenses, which disproportionately affect people of color in the guidelines’ crack cocaine 100-1 ratio for sentencing, and to impose more lenient verdicts.At the ACS event, John Payton, president and director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said that Kimbrough exemplified how the court is “conservative but is not afraid of recognizing rights.” 

And in a decision that surprised many observers, the Supreme Court adopted a broad interpretation of worker’s rights by holding in Gomez-Perez v. Potter that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) prohibits retaliation by federal employers against employees who have filed discrimination complaints.  Similarly, in CBOCS v. Humphries, the Court said that Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which bars discrimination in the making and enforcement of contracts, bars retaliation for lawsuits under that law.

Unfortunately however, the term also had a number of decisions that greatly restrict Americans’ civil rights. 

In Crawford v. Marion County Election Board and Indiana Democratic Party v. Rokita, the Supreme Court upheld a controversial Indiana voter ID law – the most restrictive in the nation – which has been widely criticized by civil rights and voting experts for creating unnecessary obstacles for individuals less likely to own such IDs, including the poor, people with disabilities, the elderly, and people of color. 

Civil rights groups and voting rights experts say that barriers like the ones created by the Indiana law may actually make voting harder for Americans and erode public confidence in the election process.  Justice John Paul Stevens, in his majority opinion, said that the law was justified in part by the state’s interest “in preventing voter fraud,” even though the state had not brought forward any evidence of voter fraud.

In another criminal justice case, Baze v. Rees, the Court held in a fractured 7-2 decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts that execution by lethal injection did not violate the 8th Amendment prohibition of “cruel and unusual punishment.”  The three-drug cocktails used in lethal injection have been controversial as evidence suggests that when the mixture does not work properly, it can cause extreme pain during execution.  

In his concurring opinion, Justice Stevens noted the continuing risk of racial discrimination in death penalty sentences and called for a re-examination of the U.S.’s use of the death penalty.  Concurring opinions agree with the holding of the majority, but are written to express a particular judge’s reasoning.

The civil rights community expressed profound disappointment with the Court’s decision.  Steven Shapiro, ACLU’s legal director, said that the decision “upheld a lethal injection protocol that veterinarians in nearly half the states, including Kentucky, are prohibited from using when putting our pets to sleep.”

The case brought national attention to the debate over death penalty reform.  Panelists at the ACS Term Review noted how this decision’s polarized 7-2 vote demonstrated a strategy of the more liberal-oriented justices “picking their fights,” perhaps as a way to break from a strategy from the previous term. 

Legal experts at the ACS panel forecasted an increasingly internationalist focus, as well as a significant voting rights case, in the Court’s next term. http://www.civilrights.org/library/features/007-supreme-court-term-ends.html

On May 5, 2008, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced, in a press release, that the EEOC settled a racial harassment lawsuit involving hangman’s nooses, KKK graffiti and racial slurs at a construction site in Pennsylvania.  See,  EEOC Press Release,  http://www.eeoc,gov/press/5-5-08.html , 5/5/08.  The EEOC said that the racial harassment included a life size noose made of heavy rope hung from a beam, the regular use of the “N-word,” racially offensive comments made to black individuals, including “I think everyone should own one,” as well as racist graffiti such as “coon,” and “I love the Ku Klux Klan.”  Id.  The EEOC’s Philadelphia District Director, who oversaw the investigation that preceded the lawsuit, said “It should be obvious to construction companies that employees in this industry have the same legal protections against discrimination as those who work in an office setting.”  Id.  A trial attorney responsible for handling the lawsuit for the EEOC added as follows: “The class members had the courage to come forward and complain, first to supervisors, who did not take action, and then to the EEOC, which did.”  Id.

Whether construction company race discrimination occurs in Beaumont, Dallas, Houston or elsewhere, victims of construction site racial harassment and race discrimination are protected by federal law and can report race discrimination in the construction industry to the EEOC and consult an attorney to investigate whether a race discrimination lawsuit in Beaumont, Dallas, Houston or elsewhere may ultimately be appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the potential construction site race discrimination case.