EEOC Seeks Public Input on Proposed Enforcement Guidance on Harassment

PRESS RELEASE JANUARY 10, 2017

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced that it has voted to release for public input a proposed enforcement guidance addressing unlawful harassment under the federal employment discrimination laws. The proposed Enforcement Guidance on Unlawful Harassment is available for input until Feb. 9, 2017 at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EEOC-2016-0009.

This proposed guidance, which is the product of extensive research, analysis, and deliberation, explains the legal standards applicable to harassment claims under federal employment discrimination laws. The laws enforced by EEOC protect individuals from harassment based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, age, or genetic information.

Between fiscal years 2012 and 2015, the percentage of private sector charges that included an allegation of harassment increased from slightly more than one-quarter of all charges annually to over 30% of all charges. In fiscal year 2015, EEOC received 27,893 private sector charges that included an allegation of harassment, accounting for more than 31% of charges filed that year. In the same year, federal employees filed 6,741 complaints alleging harassment – approximately 44% of complaints filed by federal employees that year.

“Harassment remains a serious workplace problem that is the concern of all Americans. It is important for employers to understand the actions they can take today to prevent and address harassment in their workplaces,” said Chair Jenny R. Yang. “The Commission looks forward to hearing public input on the proposed enforcement guidance.”

Preventing systemic harassment has been one of EEOC’s national enforcement priorities since 2013. The Commission reaffirmed this priority in its Strategic Enforcement Plan for 2017-2021.  At a public meeting in January 2015, the Commission established a Select Task Force on the Study of Harassment in the Workplace to analyze workplace harassment and identify innovative and creative prevention strategies. Chaired by Commissioners Chai R. Feldblum and Victoria A. Lipnic and comprised of academic experts, legal practitioners from the plaintiff and defense sides, employers, employee advocacy groups, and organized labor, the Select Task Force met 10 times between April 2015 and June 2016 to hear and consider testimony and public comments. At a June 2016 public meeting, Commissioners Feldblum and Lipnic presented their Report of the Co-Chairs of the Select Task Force on Harassment in the Workplace  (“Harassment Prevention Report”) with findings and recommendations about harassment prevention strategies.

“I am pleased that we are able to follow up on the recommendations in our Harassment Prevention Report with this release of the draft enforcement guidance on unlawful harassment,” said Feldblum.  “This guidance clearly sets forth the Commission’s positions on harassment law, provides helpful explanatory examples, and provides promising practices based on the recommendations in the report.  I believe it will be a helpful resource for employers and employees alike, and I look forward to receiving comments from the public.”

“As we learned from the Harassment Prevention Report this past year, 30 years after the U.S. Supreme Court laid down the law in this area, harassment charges and cases remain a far too dominant part of the work of the Commission,” said Lipnic. “I am pleased the Commission is offering an updated version of its positions on the important legal issues on this topic and look forward to the public input.”

The public is invited to submit input about the proposed Enforcement Guidance on Unlawful Harassment via www.regulations.gov. Alternatively, members of the public may send written feedback to: Public Input, EEOC, Executive Officer, 131 M Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20507.  Please provide input in narrative form and do not submit redlined versions of the guidance document. Input will be posted publicly on www.regulations.gov, so please do not include personal information that you do not want made public, such as your home address or telephone number. The deadline for submission of public input is February 9, 2017.

After reviewing the public input, the Commission will consider appropriate revisions to the proposed guidance before finalizing it.

EEOC advances opportunity in the workplace by enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. More information is available at www.eeoc.gov.  Stay connected with the latest EEOC news by subscribing to our email updates.

EEOC Updates Strategic Enforcement Plan

Commission Reaffirms Priorities and Strategies for Securing Strategic Impact

In December 2012, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) issued a Strategic Enforcement Plan (SEP) for Fiscal Years 2013-2016. The SEP established substantive area priorities and set forth strategies to integrate all components of EEOC's private, public, and federal sector enforcement to have a sustainable impact in advancing equal opportunity and freedom from discrimination in the workplace.  The Commission recently approved an updated SEP for Fiscal Years 2017-2021, reaffirming the agency’s commitment to efforts that have strategic impact in advancing equal opportunity in America’s workplaces.

EEOC’s Strategic Enforcement Plan for Fiscal Years 2017-2021 continues to prioritize the areas identified in its previous SEP, with some modifications:

• Eliminating barriers in recruitment and hiring;
• Protecting vulnerable workers, including immigrant and migrant workers, and under-served communities from discrimination;
• Addressing selected emerging and developing issues;
• Ensuring equal pay protections for all workers;
• Preserving access to the legal system; and
• Preventing systemic harassment.

As the Commission reinforces its efforts to address pay discrimination based on sex, this SEP also includes combating pay discrimination that persists based on race, ethnicity, age, and for individuals with disabilities.

Source: EEOC

Prestige Transportation Service to Pay and Mend Hiring Practices to Settle Race Discrimination Lawsuit

Predecessor Company Refused to Hire African-Americans,

Federal Agency Charged

 

Prestige Transportation Service, LLC. a Miami company which provides transportation services to airline personnel to and from Miami International Airport, will pay $200,000 to settle a race discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced.

The EEOC charged in its suit that Prestige's predecessor company, Airbus Alliance, Inc., which was under different ownership, repeatedly instructed its human resources manager not to hire African-American applicants because they were "trouble" and "would sue the company." Airbus also stated that it would be a "waste of paper" to give applications to black employees, the EEOC said.

According to the EEOC's suit, Airbus's owners referred to one employee as "the monkey" and fired her after she filed a discrimination charge with the EEOC. In addition, Airbus terminated its human resources manager and another employee once they opposed the company's discriminatory practices.

Such alleged practices violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race. The EEOC filed suit (Case No. 1:13-cv-20684) in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida after first attempting to reach a settlement through its conciliation process.

According to the terms of the four-year consent decree approved late Friday, September 26, 2014, by U.S. Magistrate Judge Andrea Simonton, Prestige will pay $200,000 to settle the suit. Payments will be made to three named claimants, as well as a class of black applicants for employment. In addition, Prestige has agreed to the following additional measures as part of the consent decree. The company will:

• hire class members as openings become available over the next four years;
• implement numerical goals for the hiring of black applicants;
• use targeted advertising and recruitment to encourage black applicants to apply for employment at Prestige;
• implement an anti-discrimination policy that includes clear avenues for reporting discriminatory conduct;
• train human resources personnel, management personnel, and hiring personnel on an annual basis; and
• report to the EEOC and keep records about its hiring practices and compliance with the consent decree.

"We are pleased that Prestige -- under its new ownership -- worked with the EEOC in reaching this important settlement," said Robert E. Weisberg, regional attorney of the agency's Miami District Office. "The hiring and policy changes implemented by Prestige demonstrate the company's commitment to hiring African-Americans and we are confident that going forward, Prestige will have a diverse workforce."

Malcolm Medley, director of the EEOC's Miami District, added, "This case demonstrates the EEOC's ongoing commitment to eliminating class barriers in recruitment and hiring. The EEOC will hold employers responsible if they make hiring decisions based on race rather than the applicant's ability to do the job."

Source: EEOC

This information is intended to be educational and should not be considered legal advice on any specific matter.

ACM Services Sued for Refusing to Recruit or Hire African-Americans and Women

Contractor Also Harassed Two Women and Fired Them Because They Opposed Unlawful Harassment and Discrimination, Federal Agency Charges

ACM Services, Inc., a Rockville, Md.-based environmental remediation services contractor, violated federal law when it refused to hire women and African Americans for field laborer positions and subjected two female employees to sexual and national origin harassment before firing them, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleged in a lawsuit announced.

The EEOC charged that since at least January 2005, ACM Services has exclusively used word-of-mouth recruitment practices for field laborer positions with the intent and effect of avoiding recruiting black job applicants and refusing to hire black job applicants because of their race. The EEOC lawsuit claimed that ACM Services has refused to hire female applicants for field laborer positions because of their sex.

In addition, the EEOC says that ACM Services subjected two Hispanic female employees to harassment based on sex, race and national origin. The egregious harassment included: requesting a sexual relationship of one of the women; sexual comments; making offensive comments to another of the women based on her association with persons of another race; repeatedly making derogatory comments about Hispanic persons, especially Hispanic women; and the unwelcome display of graphic sexual images of women.

The EEOC also alleged that ACM Services engaged in unlawful retaliation against the two Hispanic women because they opposed the harassment and discrimination and that this retaliation culminated in their terminations. The EEOC further charged that ACM Services failed to preserve employment applications as required by federal law and regulations.

Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits discrimination and harassment based on race, sex and national origin. Title VII also forbids employers from retaliating against individuals who oppose discrimination. The EEOC filed its lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland (EEOC v. ACM Services, Inc., Civil Action No. 8:14-cv-02997 PWG), after first attempting to reach a voluntary pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.

"It is simply unacceptable and plainly unlawful that 50 years after the passage of Title VII, some employers still refuse to recruit or hire African-Americans or women," said EEOC Philadelphia District Director Spencer H. Lewis, Jr. "We are committed to ensuring that everyone is afforded equal opportunities during the hiring process to be judged on abilities and not race or sex."

EEOC Philadelphia Regional Attorney Debra M. Lawrence said, "When employers rely exclusively on current employees to spread information concerning job vacancies to their family, friends, and acquaintances, unless the workforce is already racially and ethnically diverse, such word-of-mouth recruiting can create a barrier to equal employment opportunity for racial or ethnic groups that are not already represented in the employer's workforce - and this violates federal law."

Source: EEOC

This information is intended to be educational and should not be considered legal advice on any specific matter.

EEOC, Huyssen, Inc., Licensed to Use the Registered Service Mark Sedona Staffing, and Sedona Group Reach Agreement on Discrimination Case Involving Recruitment and Hiring

Huyssen, Inc., licensed to use the registered service mark Sedona Staffing and the Sedona Group, agreed to pay $920,000 and implement preventive measures to settle a variety of discrimination charges filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced.
 
"We are pleased that Huyssen and Sedona Group worked cooperatively with the EEOC to reach a resolution that will correct and prevent discrimination in recruitment and hiring," said Marla Stern-Knowlton, director of the EEOC's San Diego Local Office. 
 
The settlement resolves six EEOC discrimination charges filed between 2007 and 2009 alleging that the staffing firm engaged in a pattern and practice of classifying and failing to refer job applicants in San Diego based on their race, color, sex, national origin, age or disability. 
 
Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Without admitting liability, Huyssen and Sedona agreed to enter into a five-year conciliation agreement with the EEOC and alleged victims, thereby avoiding litigation. The settlement includes a class fund for currently unidentified victims who also suffered similar discrimination during the relevant time period. 
 
Potential claimants will include men and women of various races and national origins, individuals 40 years of age and older, and those with disabilities, who applied for referral employment through Huyssen, Inc. of San Diego during the period of March 1, 2007 - May 31, 2008. Within the next four months, the Claims Administrator will be issuing claims packets to potential claimants. Website links for the Claims Administrator will also be posted on the EEOC and Sedona Staffing of San Diego websites.

Aside from the monetary relief, Huyssen agreed to provide annual equal employment opportunity (EEO) and diversity training to all employees at its San Diego location, with an emphasis on non-discriminatory referral and hiring procedures. Huyssen also agreed to hire an independent EEO consultant to assist the company in revising its EEO policies and complaint procedures, training and compliance with the agreement. 
 
Eliminating barriers in recruitment and hiring, especially class-based recruitment and hiring practices that discriminate against racial, ethnic and religious groups, older workers, women, and people with disabilities, is one of six national priorities identified by the Commission's Strategic Enforcement Plan (SEP).

Source: EEOC

This information is intended to be educational and should not be considered legal advice on any specific matter.

Limiting the Applicant Data That Is Provided to OFCCP

Part 2 - Understanding Special Situations

In the first part of this two-part series, we discussed the fact that the applicant data that is provided to the U.S. Department of Labor's Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) is a critical piece of information in any affirmative action compliance review. We discovered that OFCCP's Internet Applicant rule provides a variety of ways to limit the applicant data that is submitted to OFCCP. We also identified a key idea in regard to the way that OFCCP examines applicant data:

OFCCP is interested in comparing data on the persons who could be hired for a company's positions to the persons who actually were hired.
 
In this article, we're going to examine a number of important situations that affect the applicant data that should be submitted to OFCCP. Before we continue, though, here's a short review of how the Internet Applicant rule works. The Internet Applicant rule provides a four-prong test to determine which job seekers should be counted as applicants and should thus appear in statistical reports provided to OFCCP. These four prongs are:

1. The individual submits an expression of interest in employment through the Internet or related electronic data technologies;
2. The contractor considers the individual for employment in a particular position;
3. The individual's expression of interest indicates the individual possesses the basic qualifications for the position; and,
4. The individual at no point in the contractor's selection process prior to receiving an offer of employment from the contractor, removes himself or herself from further consideration or otherwise indicates that he or she is no longer interested in the position

To read the complete article, click here
 
Source: LocalJobNetwork.com
  

This information is intended to be educational and should not be considered legal advice on any specific matter.

EEOC Reveals Strategic Plan

Source: Workplace FYI

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) has approved its Strategic Enforcement Plan (“Plan”), which grew out of the EEOC's Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2012-2016.  In essence, the Plan affirms the Administration’s enforcement objectives for the next four years.  According to the Plan, the EEOC’s enforcement will focus on six key areas: eliminating barriers in recruitment and hiring; protecting immigrant, migrant and other vulnerable workers; addressing emerging and developing employment discrimination issues; enforcing equal pay laws; preserving access to the legal system and preventing harassment through systemic enforcement and targeted outreach.  The EEOC added equal pay as a priority enforcement area; the original Plan draft did not contain this goal.  This change signifies the Administration’s concerted efforts to continue and possibly intensify compensation enforcement actions. The Plan also directs the EEOC to pursue its efforts through an integrated approach throughout the private, public (state and local) and federal sectors.  

To read more, click here.

This information is intended to be educational and should not be considered legal advice on any specific matter.