In a news release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/5-24-10.cfm , the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) announced that a Missouri construction company has settled a race harassment lawsuit filed by EEOC attorneys.  According to the May 24, 2010 news release, EEOC attorneys charged in the employment discrimination lawsuit that the company violated federal law by racially harassing three African American construction workers and then taking reprisals against them when one complained.  More specifically, EEOC attorneys asserted that the three black construction workers were subjected to unlawful racial harassment which included the use of racially charged comments and the display of a noose. 

Racial harassment and retaliation for complaining about it violate Title VII of the Civil rights Act of 1964, and the EEOC is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination.  In this regard, EEOC attorneys filed the discrimination lawsuit after the agency first attempted to reach a voluntary pre-litigation settlement.  Further information about the EEOC and the federal laws it enforces is available at www.eeoc.gov .

Whether unlawful workplace racial harassment and display of nooses occurs in Beaumont, Conroe, Port Arthur or elsewhere, victims of employment related race harassment may contact the EEOC and an attorney to determine if a racial discrimination lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential discrimination claim.

Attorneys with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) announced settlement of a discrimination retaliation lawsuit filed in Houston, Texas.  According to the EEOC news release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/5-25-10.cfm , two Dallas/Fort Worth area transportation brokerage companies will pay $50,000 and provide additional remedial relief to settle a discrimination lawsuit in which EEOC attorneys charged that the employer unlawfully retaliated against an employee by firing him because the employee had complained about workplace comments being made by two coworkers at a Sugarland, Texas facility where they worked.  More specifically, the EEOC claimed in the Houston retaliation lawsuit that the employee complained to the human resources manager about persistent inappropriate jokes about Mormons, as well as workplace comments allegedly disparaging a pregnant female coworker, women in general, and an African American.  As stated in the news release, the human resources manager reported the employee’s complaints to the general manager of the facility and the employee was fired within less than 72 hours.

The EEOC is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color and sex, including sexual harassment, as well as retaliation for complaining about discrimination.  In this regard, EEOC attorneys filed the employment discrimination lawsuit in Houston after the agency first attempted to reach a voluntary settlement.  An EEOC attorney quoted in the news release stated, in part, that “No one should lose his job for alerting human resources to inappropriate workplace behavior.”  Further information about the EEOC and the federal laws it enforces is available at www.eeoc.gov . 

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

The U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) announced in an April 26, 2010 news release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/4-26-10.cfm that the Maryland Classified Employees Association (MCEA) union will pay $80,000 to settle a retaliation discrimination lawsuit brought by EEOC attorneys on behalf of a fired MCEA employee.  According to the news release, EEOC attorneys charged in the retaliation discrimination lawsuit that the MCEA fired the employee for her perceived involvement in an EEOC investigation of her employer’s alleged unlawful employment practices, her opposition to practices she believed were discriminatory and her association with another MCEA employee who had filed a charge of discrimination.  In addition, the EEOC alleged that MCEA denied a promotion to the fired employee and subjected her to discriminatory terms and conditions of employment because she filed a discrimination charge with the EEOC against MCEA.

The EEOC is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, and retaliation against an employee for protesting employment discrimination or participating in a discrimination charge investigation violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  In this regard, EEOC attorneys filed the retaliation discrimination lawsuit after the EEOC first attempted to reach a voluntary pre-litigation settlement. 

The most frequently filed charges with the EEOC in Fiscal Year 2009 were charges of discrimination based on race, retaliation and sex-based discrimination.  Further information about the EEOC and the federal laws it enforces is available at www.eeoc.gov .

In an April 20, 2010 news release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/4-20-10.cfm , the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced that an insurance company will pay $30,000.00 and furnish other relief to settle an unlawful retaliation lawsuit EEOC attorneys filed on behalf of a company employee.  According to the news release, EEOC attorneys alleged in the retaliation lawsuit that the company demoted a male employee from associate sales manager to the position of sales associate in retaliation for reporting a complaint of sexual harassment he had received from an employee he supervised.  In addition, the retaliation lawsuit charged that the employee was demoted after he informed the alleged harasser, who was his supervisor, that he had reported the complaint.

Such alleged retaliation for reporting a sexual harassment complaint violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  In this regard, the EEOC is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, including retaliation for complaining about it.  In this case, EEOC attorneys filed the retaliation lawsuit after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement.  Further information about the EEOC and the laws it enforces is available at www.eeoc.gov .

Lawyers with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, have announced in a March 26, 2010 press release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/3-26-10a.cfm that a retaliation lawsuit has been filed against a trucking company charged with violating federal law by allegedly firing an employee for complaining about sexual harassment.  According to the EEOC press release, agency lawyers contend in the case that a truck driver complained to management officials that she had been subjected to unwelcome sexual advances and remarks over the CB radio by her co-workers.  As further stated in the press release, the EEOC contends that she was fired shortly after her complaint in retaliation for complaining about the sexual harassment.

Retaliating against an individual for reporting sexual harassment violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  EEOC lawyers filed the retaliation lawsuit after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation, voluntary settlement.  In this regard, an EEOC Director was quoted in the press release as saying “The EEOC will act to prevent this type of misconduct, and we urge employers to take swift and decisive action in response to reports of sexual harassment and hostile work environments.”  Further information about the EEOC and the federal laws it enforces is available at www.eeoc.gov .

Whether employment-related retaliation for complaining about or opposing workplace sexual harassment occurs in Beaumont, Conroe, Houston or elsewhere, victims may contact the EEOC and a lawyer to determine if a retaliation lawsuit is ultimately appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential retaliation 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 United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is a federal agency which enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, including workplace racial harassment and retaliation for complaining about it.  On December 31, 2009, EEOC lawyers announced that a Memphis radioactive waste processing company will pay $650,000 to 23 African American employees and provide other relief to settle a race and retaliation discrimination lawsuit filed by the EEOC in the Western District of Tennessee.  See, http://www.eeoc.gov.eeoc/newsroom/release/12-31-09a.cfm .  According to the EEOC’s lawsuit against Race, LLC doing business as Studsvik, LLC, a lead worker in the Studsvik shop and other African American employees were subjected to racially offensive comments by their white supervisor.  In addition, EEOC lawyers charged that the lead worker’s supervisor regularly referred to him and other African American employees with the N-word and other derogatory slurs, such as “boy.”  Moreover, white managers allegedly subjected the lead worker and other African American employees to excessive radiation exposure, more than their white co-workers.  As stated in the press release, EEOC lawyers further contended that the lead worker was suspended for 15 days and then laid off in retaliation for complaining about the racial harassment.  An EEOC lawyer with the agency’s Memphis District Office was quoted in the press release, saying, in part, that “Racial harassment remains a longstanding problem in the workplace for many minorities.”  EEOC Acting Chair Stuart Ishimaru added that “Some of the discrimination alleged in this case is unusually extreme because of the physical danger it created for African American employees.” 

Additional information about the EEOC and the federal laws it enforces may be found online in the agency’s website at www.eeoc.gov . 

Whether employment related racial harassment and retaliation occurs in Memphis or elsewhere, victims of racial harassment 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 racial harassment case.

Health Leaders Media reports that state and national nurses associations are applauding a jury’s quick verdict to acquit a Texas nurse of felony charges for reporting a physician to a state oversight board for allegedly providing unsafe patient care.  In the February 12, 2010 posting at www.healthleadersmedia.com , the online publication states that Anne Mitchell, a registered nurse, was charged with misuse of official information, a third degree felony, for reporting Rolando Arafiles, MD, to the Texas Medical Board.  Had she been convicted, Mitchell could have faced up to 10 years in prison, but, after a four day trial, an Andrews, Texas state court jury needed less than one hour to acquit Mitchell.  For her own part, Mitchell contended she was just doing her job.  The American Nurses Association (ANA) called the case blatant retaliation and Rebecca Patton, the President of the ANA, said “Nurse whistle blowers should never be fired and criminally charged for reporting questionable medical care.”  A whistleblower lawsuit claiming damages for her alleged unlawful termination may follow now that the criminal proceeding has concluded.

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.