Key Issues Targeted by EEOC in Recent Lawsuits Filed Against Employers

Periodically reviewing the most recent cases filed by the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) against various companies can help remind your office of the federal employment rights that must be regularly extended to all job applicants and current employees.

Far too often, employers fail to protect workers against hostile work environments and many different forms of harassment and discrimination.  Employees being sexually or racially harassed can never do their best work. This also holds true for people mistreated due to physical disabilities, religious beliefs – or their national origin. These types of illegal activities are constantly monitored by the EEOC so that equal employment rights can be guaranteed to everyone trying to get hired or hold down a job.

What follows is a brief review of some recent cases filed by the EEOC against companies they believe have violated federal employment laws. While some of these actions have been resolved, others are still awaiting a final ruling.

New EEOC cases reveal the broad spectrum of employment rights regularly enforced

  • A Dallas pregnancy discrimination case was decided against the employer. A receptionist working for Smiley Dental Walnut spoke to human resources to inform them that she was pregnant. After being ordered to tell her supervisor this news, the young woman complied. During the conversation with her supervisor – who noted that she did not wish to keep training the young woman since she might leave relatively soon — the pregnant employee was fired.

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, ruled against the employer. Attempts to settle prior to litigation failed. Injunctive relief (sought to make sure the company never repeated this same type of illegal behavior in the future) was sought and awarded – along with back pay and other damages. The company was ordered to pay $20,000 to the wronged employee;

  • Walmart was ordered to pay $5.2 million for intentional discrimination against a disabled employee. The mistreated worker had dutifully worked around his developmental disability, deafness, and visual difficulties for 16 years. However, a new store manager came in and demanded that new medical paperwork be submitted to document all the employee’s disabilities. The disabled employee was then suspended temporarily from his job.     

However, once the requested paperwork was produced, Walmart cut off further communications with the disabled man — basically resulting in his termination. The EEOC prevailed in this case in which $5 million of the award was for punitive damages;

  • Two female nurses filed an EEOC complaint about unequal pay. The women had job experience equal to that of a male nurse – yet the women were paid less. All three nurses complained about this issue. The EEOC won the case on behalf of the female nurses, noting the importance of closing the pay gap that often works against women in this country;
  • A case was filed involving discrimination based on national origin and religion. Three Pennsylvania employees from Puerto Rico were working for a caster and wheel company when they were subjected to workplace harassment based on their national origin and their religious (Pentecostal) beliefs. Oddly enough, it was the plant manager who was making the derogatory remarks when the harassed employees decided to report his illegal and upsetting behavior. The three employees were then subjected to retaliation (in the form of lesser work assignments) for complaining about the way they were being treated.

The EEOC stated in its pleadings that company managers should always act respectfully as role models—and never be the ones who harass their own employees;                                          

  • A sexual harassment lawsuit was filed on behalf of two female employees. The EEOC alleged in its lawsuit that the defendant hospitality companies created an abusive and hostile working environment for two of its female employees. The women complained about sexually rude comments and behavior directed toward them by their manager.

When the employees complained to their supervisors and others, nothing was done to improve their situation. In this case, a request was made for both compensatory and punitive damages – along with back pay for the two women. This suit is still pending;

  • A disability discrimination case was filed based on the way a hearing impaired job applicant was treated. When a problem arose during the hiring process related to the applicant’s hearing disability, the employer failed to accommodate her reasonable request to simply be interviewed in person and not over the phone. The company never responded to the job applicant’s email proposing this simple alternative.

Instead, four other applicants (who didn’t require any type of accommodation) were then interviewed and one of them was chosen for the job opening. The EEOC lawsuit requests lost wages, punitive and compensatory damages – and injunctive relief to prevent the employer from repeating this type of discrimination against other job applicants (or employees) who have disabilities in the future;

  • A racial slurs and harassment case. A man hired as a deckhand by a New Orleans transportation company was subjected to offensive racial epithets and conduct. When the man asked for help in stopping this behavior, the situation did not improve. Soon thereafter, a rope tied in the form of a noose was dropped near this harassed man on the deck where he was working.

The EEOC described these wrongful acts as “deeply offensive.” The government is seeking injunctive relief against the transportation company – along with compensatory and punitive damages — and any other relief the court decides is necessary.

Each of these new cases and decisions document how common intentional acts of workplace discrimination still are in this country. All employers should consider requiring annual training for every employee in hopes of seriously discouraging all forms of workplace discrimination and harassment.

Should you need help interpreting any of the federal (state or local) laws that are designed to protect employee rights, please contact one of our Murray Lobb attorneys. We’ll be glad to help you analyze any problems that you may have — or help you draft any new workplace contracts or employee handbook sections related to this (or any other employment law) topic.