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 .

In Fiscal Year 2010, the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) received 33,890 charges alleging race-based discrimination, accounting for 36 percent of the federal agency’s private sector caseload.  In this regard, racial discrimination in employment practices violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the EEOC is an agency responsible for enforcing federal laws that prohibit employment-related racial discrimination.  Within this role, the EEOC may bring suit against companies on behalf of employees subjected to racial discrimination and retaliation for complaining about racial discrimination.  For example, the EEOC posted at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/5-3-11.cfm a Press Release announcing that a transportation management company agreed to settle for $60,000 a racial harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by EEOC attorneys.  According to the Press Release, EEOC attorneys filed the employment discrimination lawsuit and charged the company with violating federal law by subjecting a black employee to racial discrimination.  In addition to seeking monetary relief, the EEOC can obtain other forms of relief, including injunctive relief to prevent and eliminate further harassment and retaliation.  More information about the EEOC is available at www.eeoc.gov . 

Whether racial slurs and comments occur in workplaces in Beaumont, Dallas, Houston or elsewhere, employees forced to experience racial harassment at work may contact the EEOC and an attorney to determine whether a racial harassment lawsuit is appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the particular case.

Employment related sex discrimination, including sexual harassment, and retaliation against persons who oppose unlawful employment practices violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is a federal agency responsible for enforcing federal laws prohibiting workplace discrimination.  As an EEOC attorney has said, “Women who work in traditionally male-dominated professions or workplaces can be particularly susceptible to sexual harassment.”  In this regard, the EEOC announced in a May 16, 2011 Press Release that a highway construction company agreed to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by EEOC attorneys for $150,000.  According to the Press Release at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/5-16-11a.cfm , the company allegedly subjected two women to egregious verbal sexual harassment by a supervisor and then fired one of the women after she repeatedly asked the supervisor to stop harassing her and complained to a job superintendent.

Whether sexual harassment in the construction industry occurs in Beaumont, Houston or elsewhere, employees subjected to offensive comments and conduct of a sexual nature or retaliation for opposing the offensive conduct may contact the EEOC and an attorney to determine if a sexual harassment lawsuit is appropriate under the particular facts and circumstances of the potential sex discrimination claim.

Retaliating against people who oppose what they believe to be discriminatory conduct can violate the Age Discrimination in Employment Act where, for example, an employee is subjected to retaliation by an employer after reporting workplace age discrimination.  On March 31, 2011, the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) announced filing of an employment discrimination lawsuit in Corpus Christi, Texas.  Posted at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/3-31-11.cfm , the EEOC Press Release states that the lawsuit charges Brooks County, Texas with violating federal law by retaliating against a secretary because she filed an age discrimination charge and lawsuit two years ago.  According to the EEOC lawsuit, Brooks County refused to give a salary increase to the secretary but salary information provided by Brooks County revealed that every single person on its list of similarly situated employees had received salary raises or were hired at higher salaries.  In this regard, the EEOC charges that Brooks County was actually punishing the secretary for filing an age discrimination charge and then lawsuit against Brooks County in 2009.  The EEOC offers information to the public about employment discrimination in its website at www.eeoc.gov .

Whether workplace discrimination based on age occurs in Corpus Christi, Houston or elsewhere, employees may contact the EEOC and an attorney to discuss their potential age discrimination case.

A school bus operator agreed to pay $150,000 and provide other relief to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by attorneys with the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), according to a February 3, 2011 Press Release provided by the EEOC.  As charged in the EEOC lawsuit, school bus drivers were touched and taunted by a supervisor, then forced out upon complaining.  More specifically, the EEOC sexual harassment lawsuit charged that a male supervisor sexually harassed at least four women, including bus drivers and a human resources assistant, by making constant sexually explicit remarks about their body parts and the sexual acts he wanted to perform on them.  The EEOC contended that the harassment turned physical when the supervisor exposed himself, grabbed the breasts of a bus driver and rubbed his private parts onto her, the EEOC charged.  Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits gender discrimination in employment, including sexual harassment.  The EEOC filed the lawsuit in September 2009 after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.

In a posting at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/10-15-10a.cfm , the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (”EEOC”) announced on October 15, 2010 that an Austin, Texas packaging company agreed to settle a racial harassment, sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by EEOC attorneys on behalf of company employees who alleged they had been subjected to a racially hostile work environment, sexual harassment and retaliation for reporting workplace discrimination.  According to the EEOC, the workplace harassment included black employees being routinely subjected to discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, insults and racially offensive comments and jokes.  In addition, the EEOC also charged that a female manager harassed male employees with unwelcome sexual comments and unsolicited physical contact of a sexual nature.  A senior trial attorney with the EEOC’s San Antonio office was quoted in the EEOC Press Release, saying, in part, that the law requires employers to take reasonable steps to prevent and correct racial and sexual harassment. 

Whether workplace racial or sexual harassment occurs in Austin, San Antonio or elsewhere, employees experiencing employment discrimination of a racial or sexual nature may contact the EEOC or an attorney to discuss making a formal charge of discrimination.  In this regard, the EEOC offers information to the public on its webite at www.eeoc.gov concerning employee rights and what an employee can do if they experience race, sex and retaliation discrimination on the job.

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 .