① Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling

Wednesday, July 14, 2021 1:01:34 PM

Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling



Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling 19, Essay On Optimism And Cardiovascular Health and James H. Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling June 14DeVos decided to delay implementation of Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling to renegotiate the Borrower Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling to Repayment Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling Gainful Employment Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling — important regulations that had been designed to Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling students Persuasive Essay On Cheerleaders predatory conduct by for-profit schools. The decree also requires Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling company to conduct anti-discrimination training at its Bishopville facility; post a notice about the settlement at that facility; implement a formal anti-discriminatory policy Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling racial discrimination; and report Coping Defense Mechanisms complaints of conduct that could constitute discrimination Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling Title VII to the EEOC Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling monitoring. Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling officials also sought additional independent research from Why Do People Lose Weight to determine if the software was discriminating against certain groups.

Fight against racial profiling

By Josh Kovensky October 7, a. Idaho Lt. By Cristina Cabrera October 6, p. By Matt Shuham October 6, p. By Kate Riga October 6, p. And The Big Lie Gang. By Josh Kovensky October 5, p. By Matt Shuham October 5, a. By Matt Shuham October 4, p. By Summer Concepcion October 3, p. By Summer Concepcion October 3, a. By Josh Kovensky October 1, p. By Matt Shuham September 30, p. By Kate Riga September 30, p. Apocalypse Now? By Jackie Wilhelm September 30, p. The AJ questioned the Director's credibility, finding that there were considerable gaps in the Director's statements. The Commission affirmed the AJ's findings on appeal, and noted that even if the Agency met its burden of providing a legitimate reason for Complainant's non-selection, the evidence supported a finding of pretext.

Specifically, Complainant was considered the best candidate by his second-level supervisor, and the record showed that Complainant was better qualified than the selectee. The Agency was ordered, among other things, to place Complainant into the position or a similar position, with appropriate back pay and benefits, and pay him proven compensatory damages. Kenny C. Dep't of Def. The contempt action charged that Danny's breached the terms of an agreement it entered into with the EEOC to resolve a racial discrimination and retaliation lawsuit.

The EEOC charged that Black entertainers were subjected to a variety of less advantageous terms and conditions of employment than White ones. The misconduct included subjecting African-American entertainers to arbitrary fees and fines, forcing them to work on less lucrative shifts, and excluding them from company advertisements, all because of their race. The EEOC also charged that Danny's retaliated against the entertainers by reducing their work hours when one of them engaged in activity protected by law, including filing a discrimination charge with the EEOC.

The EEOC alleged the retaliation was so severe that one of the entertainers was forced to leave her employment. The decree also provided for significant injunctive relief, including revising the company's anti-discrimination policy; promulgating and disseminating it to employees; providing a copy of that policy to the EEOC; providing mandatory Title VII training to supervisory and non-supervisory employees and entertainers; making periodic reports of its compliance to the EEOC; and posting a notice the policy in its workplace.

The Commission filed a contempt action, and on March 2, , the court approved an amended consent decree that extended the injunctive requirements of the decree by one year. The Commission said certain Black workers were highly qualified to become Team Leaders, but the company hired White applicants who were less qualified for the job. In its lawsuit, the EEOC charged that Dollar General refused on at least three separate occasions to promote a Black employee to a vacant assistant store manager position at its Long Beach, Miss. The EEOC alleged that she had expressed interest in promotion and had substantial qualifications, but Dollar General instead hired less-qualified white applicants.

The suit further alleged that Dollar General subjected the Black employee to increasing hostility and discipline after she complained about the unequal treatment. The company denied the allegations in court. The court denied Dollar General's motion for summary judgment and the parties ultimately entered a two-year consent decree requiring Dollar General to maintain effective anti-discrimination policies, distribute the policies to all newly hired employees, and provide management training on anti-discrimination laws and other injunctive relief to ensure discrimination complaints are promptly reported and investigated.

June 11, The EEOC's findings arose from its investigation of the apprentice's appeal of his dismissal, which he filed with the court-appointed special master who monitors Local 25 and its JATC pursuant to past judicial findings of race and national origin discrimination. The JATC imposed this severe sanction despite the apprentice satisfactorily completing virtually the entire eight-term program and despite his complaints about inadequate on-the-job training from biased contractors.

The EEOC had alleged that the Farms subjected American workers, most of whom were African American, to discrimination based on national origin and race at their Colquitt County location. According to the EEOC's lawsuit, the employer favored foreign born workers or workers they believed to be foreign born, while engaging in a pattern or practice of discrimination against White American and African American workers. Regarding the disparate terms and conditions, the agency alleges that work start times were habitually delayed for White American and African American workers, that they were sent home early while foreign workers continued to work, and that they were subjected to production standards not imposed on foreign born workers.

These practices led to all American workers receiving less pay than their foreign born counterparts. The settlement provides monetary relief to 19 persons who filed charges with the agency and other American workers harmed by the practices. Additionally, Hamilton Growers agreed to exercise good faith in hiring and retaining qualified workers of American national origin and African-American workers for all farm work positions, including supervisory positions; will implement non-discriminatory hiring measures, which include targeted recruitment and advertising, appointment of a compliance official, and training for positive equal employment opportunity management practices; will create a termination appeal process; extend rehire offers to aggrieved individuals from the growing seasons; provide transportation for American workers; and limit contact between the alleged discriminating management officials and American workers.

The decree also provides for posting anti-discrimination notices, record-keeping and reporting to the EEOC. In its lawsuit, the EEOC charged that near Union City violated federal law by paying an African-American maintenance worker less than White counterparts and subjecting him to a hostile work environment. The EEOC asserted that Williams Country Sausage gave raises and paid higher salaries to all maintenance department employees except the department's lone African-American employee and allegedly allowed a supervisor to regularly use racially offensive language toward the employee because of racial animus.

The five-year consent decree enjoins the sausage company from engaging in future race discrimination, and requires annual Title VII training on employee rights, record-keeping of racial harassment complaints, and annual reports to the EEOC. The decree also requires the company to establish and enforce a written policy that will ensure that employees are protected from discrimination. Ganley Lincoln of Bedford Inc.

Ohio consent decree entered Apr. In October , Reliable Inc. Employees alleged that managers made offensive jokes about Muslim and Native American employees' religious practices and traditions, and used racial epithets like "nr," "drunken Indians," "red. According to the EEOC's lawsuit, two Black carpenters were subjected to racial harassment during their employment by a White supervisor, who made racially derogatory comments including calling them "nr. JL Schwieters Construction, Inc. According to the EEOC's suit, a Black maintenance mechanic at the Taylor Shellfish's Samish Bay Farm faced repeated demeaning comments about his race, including the use of the "N word," "spook" and "boy. When the mechanic reported this behavior to management, the supervisor retaliated against him and Taylor Shellfish simply advised him to "put his head down and do what he was told.

Under the consent decree resolving this case, Taylor Shellfish has agreed to implement new policies, conduct extensive training for employees and management, post an anti-discrimination notice at the workplace and report compliance to the EEOC for a three-year period. Taylor Shellfish Company, Inc. July 31, In July , the Fourth Circuit reversed summary judgment in an employment discrimination case alleging race, national origin, religion, and pregnancy discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation in violation of Title VII and 42 U.

During her work tenure, Washenko made several derogatory comments about Morrocans, Muslims and Middle Easterns, often referring to them as "terrorists" and "crooks. By failing to address numerous comments that were open to a racially motivated interpretation, and by circumscribing its analysis to just one comment without reviewing the totality of the circumstances, the district court committed reversible error in its grant of summary judgment for Fairview on the discrimination and hostile work environment claims. The Fourth Circuit also decided that discriminatory discrete acts could support a hostile work environment claim even if it is separately actionable. Guessous v. Fairview Prop. According to the EEOC's complaint, a Black powder coater at the Bishopville plant was repeatedly subjected to racial slurs by two White employees.

The comments included repeated use of the "N-word. Within hours of his final complaint, the coater was fired, allegedly in retaliation for his complaints of racial harassment. The consent decree enjoins Carolina Metal from engaging in future racial discrimination. The decree also requires the company to conduct anti-discrimination training at its Bishopville facility; post a notice about the settlement at that facility; implement a formal anti-discriminatory policy prohibiting racial discrimination; and report certain complaints of conduct that could constitute discrimination under Title VII to the EEOC for monitoring. In December , Swissport Fueling, Inc. The lawsuit alleged that a Swissport manager routinely called the African fuelers "monkeys" in various degrading ways.

A manager also made demeaning references to slavery to the fuelers, such as telling them: "You guys are lucky I pay you because way back then, you did not get paid"; "You are lucky to be paid. A long time ago Blacks were doing this for free"; "At one time, you people would not be paid"; and "Blacks work for free. Swissport Fueling, Inc. The complaint alleged that they complained to the company about racial comments that included the "N-word" made by a White employee between June and August , but the harassment continued.

The three-year settlement includes the company's agreement to not permit or maintain a hostile work environment based on race, not to discriminate or retaliate against any employees because of opposition to any unlawful practice, a posting of procedures for reporting discrimination and harassment, the submission of a report to EEOC regarding internal discrimination and harassment complaints, and the provision of a neutral letter of reference that states one of the affected employees left employment because he was laid off. Carolina Mattress Guild Inc. According to the EEOC's suit, Titan's highest-level managers subjected its sole Black driver, Michael Brooks, to discriminatory treatment during his employment, including assigning White drivers more favorable routes, requiring Brooks to perform degrading and unsafe work assignments.

Brooks was also subjected to harassment such as racial slurs and racially derogatory insults, taunting and racial stereotypes, including the use of the "N-word. After Titan's attorney withdrew from the case, the court found Titan did not continue to assert its defenses and ignored several orders of the court, displaying a reckless and willful disregard for the judicial proceedings. As a result, a default judgment was entered by U.

District Judge M. Titan Waste Services, Inc. In March , Olympia Construction, Inc. Olympia Constr. The EEOC alleged that the distributor's supervisors, including the Black employee's supervisor, used that restroom, yet the racist message remained for 30 days after he complained. In addition to the monetary relief, the consent decree requires the company will repaint the restrooms and train employees on race discrimination within 45 days. MBM Corp. Iowa consent decree granted June 24, According to the EEOC's suit, an African-American employee of Torqued-Up assigned to a field crew in South Texas experienced racial harassment in the form of racial slurs and epithets from two employees who supervised him on the job. According to the EEOC, the employee, who had 30 years of experience in the oil industry, reported the racial harassment to Torqued-Up's management, but instead of putting a stop to it, the company unlawfully retaliated against him.

The punishment included removing the man from his crew and assigning him to perform menial tasks such as washing trucks and sweeping, rather than the oil field work that he had been hired to perform, and reducing his work hours, thereby reducing his income. Torqued-Up Energy Services, Inc. May 28, The EEOC filed suit against the company in September , charging that the company subjected Antonio and Joby Bratcher and a class of African-American employees to racial harassment and retaliation. In a ruling last year, Judge Dale A. Kimball found that the Bratchers and class member James Buie were subjected to an objectively hostile work environment based on race. The court observed that the site superintendent, Paul E. Facer, referred to the African-American employees as "nrs" or a variation of that word almost every time he spoke to them.

Other Holmes employees used the term "nr-rigging" while working there, and racist graffiti was evident both inside and outside portable toilets on the work site. In addition to the monetary relief, Holmes also committed to implement several affirmative steps to prevent and address race-based conduct on the worksite. These measures include: a comprehensive training regimen on discrimination including racial discrimination and harassment ; discussions of harassment in work site meetings on a monthly basis; the provision of an external ombudsman to receive and investigate complaints of discrimination or retaliation; and a detailed review and revision of Holmes' policies and procedures concerning protected-class discrimination and retaliation.

Utah consent decree filed Apr. The foreman also told racist jokes in the workplace, and made negative comments about African Americans; including that Sean Bell shot by the police at a nightclub deserved to be shot, and threatened that candidate Barack Obama would be shot before the country allowed a Black president. The abuse lasted for two months and escalated when the co-worker physically assaulted the Black employee and inflicted serious permanent injuries. During a four-day bench trial, the court heard evidence that the employee repeatedly reported offensive verbal conduct and gestures by the co-worker to Whirlpool management before she was violently assaulted, without any corrective action by the company.

The trial also established that the employee suffered devastating permanent mental injuries that will prevent her from working again as a result of the assault. Whirlpool filed a motion to alter or amend the judgment on January 15, which the district court denied on March 31, On April 26, , Whirlpool appealed the judgment to the U. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The plant where the discrimination occurred had closed during the litigation period. Whirlpool Corp. June 12, granting joint motion to dismiss.

A noose was displayed in the worksite, derogatory racial language, including references to the Ku Klux Klan, was used by a direct supervisor and manager and that race-based name calling occurred. Ready Mix denies that racial harassment occurred at its worksites. The two-year decree enjoins Ready Mix from engaging in further racial harassment or retaliation and requires that the company conduct EEO training. Ready Mix will be required to modify its policies to ensure that racial harassment is prohibited and a system for investigation of complaints is in place.

The company must also report certain complaints of harassment or retaliation to the EEOC for monitoring. The jury also found that one employee was fired in retaliation for complaining about the hostile environment. In a complaint filed in June , EEOC alleged that, from at least May through June , one Black employee was subjected to derogatory and threatening comments based on his race by his supervisor and co-workers, and that a coworker mechanic displayed a noose and asked him if he wanted to "hang from our family tree.

Evidence also revealed that A. Widenhouse's general manager and the employee's supervisor also regularly made racial comments and used racial slurs, such as asking him if he would be the coon in a "coon hunt" and alerting him that if one of his daughters brought home a Black man, he would kill them both. The employee also frequently heard other co-workers use racial slurs such as "nigger" and "monkey" over the radio when communicating with each other.

The second Black employee testified that, when he was hired in , he was the company's only African American and was told he was the "token black. Both employees reported the racial harassment, but company supervisors and officers failed to address the hostile work environment. Widenhouse Inc. In January , Emmert International agreed to settle an employment discrimination lawsuit filed by EEOC that charged the company harassed and retaliated against employees in violation of federal law. Emmert's foreman and employees regularly used the "n-word," called the Black employee "boy," called the White employee a "n lover," and made racial jokes and comments. The decree also requires Emmert International to post notices explaining federal laws against workplace discrimination.

Emmert Industrial Corp. It also decided, however, that a jury must determine if the three Black plaintiffs found the workplace subjectively offensive because, although their repeated complaints indicate they were offended, a jury must resolve factual issues raised by some co-workers' testimony that the plaintiffs actually did not seem bothered by the harasser's conduct. The court said the undisputed evidence also indicated that human resources manager told the company's employees during a safety meeting not to "nigger rig their jobs"; that company management was aware the worksite's portable toilets were covered with racist graffiti; and that other White supervisors and employees routinely used racial epithets, including an incident where a White supervisor commented regarding rap music being played in a van transporting employees to the worksite, "I'm not listening to this nigger jig.

But I see you as a black man. Utah Oct. In March , the EEOC sued a restaurant in Menomonie, Wisconsin because its managers allegedly posted images of a noose, a Klan hood and other racist depictions, including a dollar bill that was defaced with a noose around the neck of a Black-faced George Washington, swastikas, and the image of a man in a Ku Klux Klan hood. A Black employee to complained and then was fired. Northern Star Hospitality Inc. The EEOC said that a noose was displayed in the worksite, that derogatory racial language, including references to the Ku Klux Klan, was used by a direct supervisor and manager and that race-based name calling occurred. The two-year decree also enjoins Ready Mix from engaging in further racial harassment or retaliation and requires that the company conduct EEO training.

In August , a federal district court entered a default judgment in favor of the EEOC in its lawsuit alleging that a pipeline construction company permitted several African American employees to be subjected to hanging nooses in the workplace even after they complained about the offensive displays. The company failed to retain counsel to prosecute the lawsuit. The court also enjoined the company from discriminating on the basis of race or protected conduct in violation of Title VII. Pipeline Constr. Ohio Aug. According to the EEOC complaint, two employees at one of the company's North Carolina salons were allegedly fired for opposing what they reasonably believed was an unlawful employment practice.

They alleged a soon-to-be salon manager told them that she did not want African-Americans working in the salon. The two employees then told an African-American candidate for an open position at the salon they believed the manager would not hire her due to her race. The company then purportedly fired the two employees, stating they had lied. The two year consent decree requires Regis to report the action it takes in response to any employee's complaint about discrimination and to post a notice to employees concerning their rights under federal, anti-discrimination laws. Regis Corp. June The lawsuit alleged that since November , a White manager harassed the worker of Filipino heritage by directing racial slurs "non-white mfr," "non-white guy," "spic," "nr," "monkey" and "ape" at him, jabbing him with a finger in the stomach and chest, and once urinating on his leg while he worked under a truck.

No supervisor made any attempt to stop the abuse. The employee ultimately was fired after he complained to the company's safety manager about the harassment. May 24, The Commission lawsuit charged that Izza's manager instructed Peltonen not to hire the Black employee, who was working as a temporary employee, to a permanent position, and told her to get rid of him because of his race. The display included a dollar bill with a noose around George Washington's neck and drawings of a man on horseback and a hooded figure with "KKK" written on his hood. The district court decided that the companies were a single employer.

The court also entered a three-year injunction, enjoining the defendants from: discharging employees in retaliation for complaints about racially offensive postings in their workplace; failing to adopt policies that explicitly prohibit actions made unlawful under Title VII; failing to adopt an investigative process with regard to discrimination claims; and failing to provide annual training regarding Title VII to Chris Brekken, who owns all interests in the three corporate defendants, and other managers. On appeal, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment and held for the first time held that a tax-offset award was appropriate in a Title VII claim when the lump-sum award place the employee in a higher tax bracket.

The court also held that the new entity operating as a Denny's franchise was liable as a successor. Northern Star Hospitality, Inc. Judgment filed Feb. The EEOC's lawsuit charged that OfficeMax violated federal law when its store manager retaliated against a sales associate after the associate complained that he had been terminated because he is Hispanic. The EEOC's suit alleged that the company excluded Black applicants for jobs at the company's Little Rock location based upon their race.

The EEOC also alleged that the company retaliated against other employees and former employees for opposing or testifying about the race discrimination, by demoting and forcing one out of her job and by suing others in state court. In addition to the monetary relief, the three-year consent decree requires the company to provide mandatory annual three-hour training on race discrimination and retaliation under Title VII; have its president or another officer appear at the training to address the company's non-discrimination policy and the consequences for discriminating in the workplace; maintain records of race discrimination and retaliation complaints; and provide annual reports to the EEOC. Bankers Asset Management, Inc.

In its complaint, the EEOC said the driver was subjected to racial slurs by a supervisor and taunts by White employees. In one instance, the EEOC says a co-worker flaunted a swastika tattoo and talked about keeping the White race "pure. In March , a Warren, Mich. The EEOC had charged that the company unlawfully retaliated against an employee for objecting to race discrimination. In its lawsuit, the EEOC said that Atsalis retaliated against a journeyman painter, who complained about the use of the "N-word" by his foreman, by not bringing him back to work for the work season.

In addition to the monetary award, the decree requires the company to provide ongoing anti-discrimination training to all of the company's officers, managers, supervisors and human resources personnel; create a new anti-discrimination policy; institute new procedures for handling discrimination complaints; and file reports with the EEOC regarding compliance with the decree's requirements. Atsalis Bros. Painting Co. The EEOC charged that Hospman's former chief executive officer ordered the housekeeping supervisor to terminate all of the housekeepers - all but one of whom were Black - because he did not work with "those kind of people.

The only black front desk attendant also was terminated, while other non-Black front desk workers were allowed to continue their employment. Under the consent decree resolving the EEOC's claims, Hospman also will revise policies regarding race discrimination complaints as set forth in its employee handbook; conduct annual training of its managers and supervisors on the requirements of Title VII; post a notice about the lawsuit for its employees; and report to the EEOC regarding complaints of race discrimination and the company's employment practices. The EEOC charged SFI, a fabricator and supplier of heavy-gauge steel and value-added products, with discharging three black employees on the same day because of their race.

The three employees worked in the supply chain department at SFI and allegedly had no performance issues before their discharges. The agency alleges these actions were motivated by race. In addition to monetary relief, the company must provide race discrimination training to all employees. SFI of Tenn. LLC , No. The EEOC charged that the director's firing followed the termination of other African-American managers at the facility and was part of a company plan to eliminate African-Americans from management. In addition to the monetary relief, the EEOC consent decree requires the company to provide EEO training and to post a notice about the lawsuit in the workplace. Bloom at Belfair , No. June 9, The EEOC filed an amicus brief in the case on behalf of the pro se plaintiff, a year old white female front desk clerk, who repeatedly had been told she was "too old" and "the wrong color" by the hotel general manager who terminated her.

The Commission argued that, contrary to the district court's requirement that the plaintiff needed to identify comparators or a replacement to establish a prima facie case, the discriminatory comments were direct evidence of animus and sufficient to establish a prima facie case of discrimination as well as raise triable issues of pretext sufficient to overcome summary judgment. The Eleventh Circuit essentially agreed and concluded that the discriminatory comments constituted circumstantial evidence of discrimination sufficient to defeat summary judgment. Kilgore v. Trussville Dev.

In its lawsuit, the EEOC said the Clearwater strip club and its successor corporation, Executive Gentlemen's Club, fired a bartender because its owner said he didn't want a Black bartender working at the club. The EEOC claimed that former manager who hired her, was suspended and then fired after he refused to comply with the owner's request. The awarded relief included punitive damages, compensatory damages, back pay, interest and tax-penalty offsets.

Chapman University, a private university in Orange, Calif. The EEOC contended that Dellande was denied both tenure and promotion to associate professor in because she is African-American, despite strong recommendations in her favor by many professional peers. The university discharged her in June upon a denial of her tenure appeal. According to the EEOC's suit, Dellande was the first Black professor to have been allowed to apply for tenure at the ASBE, and was subjected to a higher standard for obtaining tenure and promotion than her non-Black peers. Chapman Univ. June 20, In September , a Rosemont, Ill. In its lawsuit, the EEOC charged that the food distributor violated federal law by firing an African-American employee who worked at its Memphis facility because of his race.

Specifically, the EEOC said, the company discharged the black employee after he failed to stop a Caucasian driver who reported to work under the influence of alcohol from making deliveries on his route. US Foods did not terminate the Caucasian driver for being under the influence, or another Caucasian safety specialist who saw the driver at the first stop on his route. Instead, the company discharged the white driver later for an unrelated matter. US Foods, Inc. Foodservice, Inc. In April , the Fifth Circuit ruled that Kansas City Southern Railway Company KCSR violated Title VII when engaged in race discrimination by terminating two Black employees because of work rule violations and retaining their similarly-situated White co-drivers who were involved in the same incidents leading to Black employees' dismissals.

The Court also took issue with KCSR's failure to document the reasons for the terminations and inability to identify the decisionmaker. KCSR , No. In addition to monetary relief, the four-year consent decree required Pioneer Hotel must hire a consultant to help implement policies, procedures and training for all workers to prevent discrimination, harassment and retaliation.

The company also will receive additional training on its responsibilities under Title VII, will have to immediately report complaints to the human resources department, and must create a centralized system to track complaints. Pioneer Hotel, Inc. June 17, In June , Pioneer Hotel, Inc. Housekeeping and security department staffers in particular were constantly the targets of slurs by several supervisors and co-workers.

Pioneer entered into a four-year consent decree that prohibits Pioneer from creating, facilitating or permitting a hostile work environment for employees who are Latino or darker-skinned. Additionally, the hotel agreed to hire an outside equal employment opportunity consultant to ensure that the company implements effective policies, procedures and training for all employees to prevent discrimination, harassment and retaliation.

Pioneer management will receive additional training on its responsibilities under Title VII; be required to immediately report complaints to the human resources department; create a centralized system to track complaints; and be held accountable for failing to take appropriate action. Notice of consent decree will be visibly posted at the hotel. In March , a Fairfax County, Va. According to the EEOC's suit, an estimator and assistant project manager was subjected to derogatory comments from his supervisors, project manager and the company's owner on the basis of his national origin Pakistani , religion Islam , and color brown. The lawsuit indicated that the comments occurred almost daily and included things like telling the estimator he was the same color as human feces.

The lawsuit also alleged that the estimator was told that his religion Islam , was "fing backwards," and "fing crazy," and was asked why Muslims are such "monkeys. In April , the EEOC found that the transportation department engaged in race and color discrimination when it failed to select the Complainant, the Acting Division Secretary, for the position of Division Secretary. The EEOC found the Agency's explanation to be "so fraught with contradiction as not to be credible," and thus, a pretext for discrimination.

The EEOC ordered the placement of Complainant into the Division Secretary position, with appropriate back pay and benefits, and payment of attorney's fees and costs. Bowers v. Dep't of Transp. In June , the EEOC filed an amicus brief in support of a pro se plaintiff whose race and age discrimination case was dismissed for failure to establish a prima facie case. The Commission argued in this appeal that the district court erred in dismissing the case because the general manager's repeated references to the plaintiff's race and age, such as "you're the wrong color" and "you're too old" along with plaintiff's supervisor's comment to her, "old white bi…" shortly before the general manager and supervisor terminated plaintiff were sufficient to establish a prima facie case and to provide evidence of pretext.

Trussville Develop. A former attorney for the County of Kauai's Office of the Prosecuting Attorney, who is Caucasian, alleged that she was harassed due to her race by a top-level manager. The manager allegedly made continually disparaging comments to the former attorney, saying that she needed to assimilate more into the local culture and break up with her boyfriend at the time, also White, in favor of a local boy. Following the determination, the County of Kauai entered into an over two-year conciliation agreement with the EEOC and the alleged victim.

Aside from the monetary relief, the county agreed to establish policies and complaint procedures dealing with discrimination and harassment in the workplace and to provide live EEO training to all managers and supervisors. The county further agreed to post notices on the matter on all bulletin boards throughout the county and to permit the disclosure of the settlement. Following a hearing, the AJ found that the U. Department of Agriculture Agency discriminated against Complainant on the bases of race and age when it did not select him for a. Contracting Officer position. The AJ determined that Complainant's qualifications were plainly superior to the Selectee's qualifications in that Complainant had more years of contracting experience, had contracting experience involving more complex matters and higher monetary amounts, and had more years of supervisory experience.

The AJ also found that the Selecting Official's testimony about the Selectee's qualifications was not credible and was not supported by the documentation in the record. On appeal, the Commission concluded that the AJ's finding was supported by substantial evidence, and agreed with the AJ that the Agency's legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for not selecting Complainant was a pretext for race and age discrimination. While the Agency asserted that the Selecting Official's selection history precluded a finding of discrimination, the Commission stated that selection history is not controlling, and the AJ reasonably relied upon Complainant's prior performance appraisal as an indicator of his performance.

Further, the AJ was entitled to draw a reasonable inference from the fact that the Selecting Official did not contact Complainant's supervisor despite having contacted the Selectee's most recent supervisor. Neil M. Dep't of Agric. The loan processor applied for a promotion but was passed over for five lesser qualified Caucasian women aged between 23 and 30 who were based in various other branch offices, even though the processor had the best combination of relevant, objective scores that measured productivity, was "loan processor of the year" for , the year immediately preceding the promotion decision, worked at the one of the largest and most profitable offices in the relevant district, and was the "go-to person" for the district on loan processing.

Wells Fargo Financial Michigan, Inc. According to the EEOC lawsuit, an over 40, African-American female employee who worked in loss prevention at several Sears stores in the Oklahoma City area, from until her termination in March of , was passed over for promotion to supervisor several times beginning in in favor of younger, less experienced, White males. Sears allegedly retaliated against Johnson for her initial EEOC discrimination charge in September by subjecting her to worsening terms and conditions at work. The harassment by White employees of King-Lar Co. Under a month consent decree, the company must designate an EEOC-approved individual to conduct independent investigations into future complaints of workplace harassment and determine what, if any, disciplinary and corrective action needs to be taken in response to a harassment complaint.

King-Lar's policies and training materials also must reference the name and contact information for the designated employee as well as an number and website that employees can use to make anonymous complaints. The company also agreed to fulfill notice-posting, training, and reporting requirements. King-Lar Co. In December , an agricultural farm in Norman Park, Ga. Pursuant to the consent decree settling the suit, the Hamilton Growers will exercise good faith in hiring and retaining qualified workers of American national origin and African-American workers for all farm work positions, including supervisory positions.

Hamilton Growers will also implement non-discriminatory hiring measures, which include targeted recruitment and advertising, appointment of a compliance official, and training for positive equal employment opportunity management practices. The company has also pledged, among other things, to create a termination appeal process; extend rehire offers to aggrieved individuals from the growing seasons; provide transportation for American workers which is essential to viable employment in that part of the country; and limit contact between the alleged discriminating management officials and American workers.

Pursuant to a three-year consent decree, the university also will improve and implement university-wide enhanced policies and complaint procedures; designate an EEO coordinator to monitor NYU's compliance with federal anti-discrimination laws; conduct in-person, comprehensive EEO training sessions for employees, supervisors, and HR staff; and maintain records of its responses to future employee complaints of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation. NYU , No. The EEOC's lawsuit asserted that a non-Rastafarian security officer threatened to shoot a group of Rastafarian officers. When the Rastafarians complained, a white security supervisor made light of the physical threat and implied the Rastafarians were at fault.

One Rastafarian security officer objected to the supervisor's reaction and complained that he heard the supervisor had referred to the Rastafarians by the "N-word. The EEOC had previously sued the developer for failing to accommodate the religious beliefs of four Rastafarian employees who needed modifications to its dress code. That lawsuit was resolved by a consent decree which prohibited Grand Central Partnership from retaliating against Rastafarian security officers for their participation in the lawsuit, but the developer's current conduct constituted a breach of the earlier consent decree. In addition to the monetary relief, the new consent decree requires the developer to conduct extensive training on investigating discrimination complaints, including methods for proper documentation and unbiased assessment of witness credibility.

The decree also requires developer to regularly report to EEOC about any further complaints of religious discrimination or retaliation. Grand Central Partnership, Inc. In June , the EEOC reversed the Administrative Judge's finding of no discrimination by summary judgment, which the Department of Homeland Security Agency adopted, regarding Complainant's claim that the Agency discriminated against her, an African American woman, when it failed to select her for a promotion.

The Commission instead found that summary judgment in favor of Complainant was appropriate. The Selecting Official stated that she did not select Complainant for the position because Complainant did not demonstrate experience relevant to the job description, while the Selectee did demonstrate relevant experience and received the highest interview score. The record, however, showed that Complainant specifically listed relevant experience in all areas identified by the Selecting Official, and that the Selectee's application failed to establish relevant experience in two areas.

In addition, one of the individuals on the interview panel stated that the Selectee was not completely qualified for the position. The Agency also appeared to have violated its Merit Promotion Plan by having a lower-level employee participate in the interview panel. Therefore, the Commission found that Complainant established that the Agency's stated reasons for her non-selection were a pretext for race and sex discrimination. The Agency was ordered, among other things, to offer Complainant the position or a substantially similar position, and pay her appropriate back pay, interest, and benefits.

Shayna P. In January , Gonnella Baking Co. According to the EEOC's complaint, Gonnella violated federal law by allegedly failing to respond adequately to a Black employee's complaints that he endured a pervasive pattern of disparaging racial comments made by his co-workers. Examples of the harassing conduct included persistent coded references to black employees as "you people," as well as offensive statements such as, "Black people are lazy," and "I better watch my wallet around you.

Gonnella Baking Co. In July , Area Temps, Inc. The EEOC said that Area Temps used code words to describe its clients and applicants for discriminatory purposes, such as "chocolate cupcake" for young African American women, "hockey player" for young White males, "figure skater" for White females, "basketball player" for Black males, and "small hands" for women in general. Area Temps , No. Ohio consent decree filed July 21, Trans Bay Steel, Inc.

On January Federal Arguments Against Racial Profilingthe CFPB abruptly dropped a lawsuit against four online payday Steven Universe Gender Analysis who unlawfully made loans of up to percent APR in Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling least 17 states. ISSN Roundtable participants largely acknowledged Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling notion that Hrm/531 Week 4 Federal Arguments Against Racial Profiling employ cross-functional teams.

Current Viewers: