Source One Staffing to Pay $800,000 to Settle Multiple EEOC Discrimination Claims

Among Many Violations, Chicago-Area Staffing Company Assigned Temporary Employees To Clients on the Basis of Sex, Federal Agency Charged.

A Chicago-area staffing agency will pay $800,000 under a consent decree resolving two discrimination lawsuits filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced.

The EEOC's two lawsuits alleged multiple violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Specifically, the EEOC charged that Source One Staffing, Inc. engaged in the following unlawful conduct: the company 1) assigned female employees to a known hostile work environment; 2) retaliated against two female employees who reported that their supervisor was making sexual advances toward them; 3) categorized jobs as "men's work" or "women's work" and assigned employees accordingly; 4) asked impermissible pre-employment medical questions in violation of the ADA; and 5) failed or refused to assign employees to certain jobs because of their race and/or national origin.

The EEOC filed the suits in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division (EEOC v. Source One Staffing, Inc., Civil Action Nos. 11-cv-06754 & 15-cv-01958) after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process in both cases.

The consent decree settling the suits, entered by U.S. District Judge Sara L. Ellis on May 6, provides $800,000 in monetary relief. Of that, $70,000 will go to the sexual harassment and retali­ation victims. The remaining $730,000 will be distributed evenly to a class of female employees who were not considered for certain work on the basis of their sex. 
 
The decree also requires Source One to take the following affirmative steps: 1) train its employees on employees' rights under Title VII and the ADA; 2) report complaints of discrimination during the decree's three-year term; 3) change its employment policies and practices to conform to the ADA and Title VII; and 4) post a notice of the decree at all of its locations. Finally, Source One's compliance with decree will overseen by an independent monitor, Chris Wilmes of Hughes Socol Piers Resnick & Dym, Ltd.

"While the consent decree puts an end to four-years of litigation between EEOC and Source One, the matter is far from over," said John Hendrickson, regional attorney for the EEOC's Chicago District. "The EEOC - through the appointment of an independent monitor - will keep a watchful eye on Source One to make sure it fulfills all of its obligations under the decree for the next three years. If Source One fails to adhere to the decree, the EEOC will do everything in its power to ensure compliance."

Julianne Bowman, director of the EEOC's Chicago District Office, added, "The EEOC determined that Source One violated federal anti-discrimination law in multiple ways, which was alarming, and clearly required serious EEOC action. Further, staffing agencies must understand that they are not immune from enforcement of federal anti-discrimination laws. This decree sends a strong signal to other staffing agencies that if they engage in discrimination - especially several different kinds of it -- it will come at a high cost."

Source: EEOC

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

Race and National Origin Discrimination Persist 50 Years after EEOC’s Founding, Experts Say

Panel of Practitioners At Miami Meeting Of the EEOC Says Despite Positive Advances, Fight For Equal Treatment in Employment Far From Over

Despite significant progress in the 50 years since the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) first opened its doors in 1965, the problems of discrimination against racial and ethnic minorities remain a reality in 21st century America, a panel of experts told the Commissioners of the EEOC at a meeting held at Miami Dade College.

This is the first public Commission meeting held outside of Washington, D.C. in more than a decade. The Commission took the step of meeting in Miami due, in part, to the multicultural and ethnically diverse population in south Florida, and the wide range of employers in the state, from agriculture, to tourism, to multinational corporations.

"Over the past 50 years, the Commission has made great strides in promoting equal employment opportunity for America's workers," said EEOC Chair Jenny R. Yang. "Never before in our nation's history has the American workplace been more diverse and inclusive than it is today. Yet, across the country, we continue to see persistent barriers to opportunity based on race, color and national origin. At the EEOC, we are working every day to remove these barriers to achieve broad and sustained compliance with our anti-discrimination laws."

Barbara Arnwine, President and CEO of the national Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, urged the EEOC "to exercise leadership in bringing the multiple factors" of race and gender to light as "the legal framework necessary to effectively address racial and gender bias is still developing." In noting the discriminatory impact of background screening on African Americans, she recognized that "employers promote fair treatment for all employees, regardless of race, when they follow the evidence-based employment policies that the EEOC recommends to ensure that they apply job-related standards when they hire new workers, or evaluate existing workers or former workers."

The EEOC's Enforcement Guidance on Consideration of Arrest and Conviction Records in Employment Decisions "has had a transformational impact on" one major barrier to employment, said Robert Weisberg, regional attorney in the EEOC's Miami district office responsible for the agency's Florida litigation.

"Human resource personnel have reexamined their criminal background screening practices due to the guidance," he said. "The EEOC's work in this area has benefitted many black and Hispanic job applicants who would otherwise have been excluded from consideration solely based on prior arrests or convictions."

Victoria Mesa-Estrada, an attorney who represents low wage workers and previously worked at the Migrant Farmworker Justice Project in Florida, reported that 58 percent of Latinos say that discrimination in the workplace is a problem. She emphasized the importance of the EEOC having investigators trained to deal with cultural issues and expanding its outreach to vulnerable populations such as farmworkers.

Iliana Castillo-Frick, Vice Provost of Human Resources at Miami Dade College and speaking on behalf of the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) noted that a way to break down barriers was for organizations to foster a culture of inclusion and diversity-not just adherence to the law. It is crucial for the head of an organization to communicate the importance of diversity and inclusion, reaching out to different employee groups, setting goals and analyzing whether those goals have been met.

Donald Livingston, a partner in the management firm of Akin Gump and a former general counsel of the EEOC, also emphasized the need to make diversity a corporate priority. This should include monitoring job-related practices in hiring and promotion for potential disparate impact. Where possible, a company should use alternative or modified practices that have less of a disparate impact on a given group. Associated with this, he urged the EEOC to take on the "long overdue" task of "renovation of the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures," which have been in place since 1978, predating the computer era and modern methods of employee selections, to say nothing of a vastly changed workplace.

Those modern methods of job selection include some form of online screening, Kathleen Lundquist, an industrial organizational psychologist, told the Commission. Today, 81 percent of organizations use some sort of online screening assessment before there is some form of human interaction. These assessments can be designed to have more job relevance, with less of a disparate impact, reducing barriers to employment for racial and ethnic minorities.

Dr. William Spriggs, Chief Economist to the AFL-CIO and professor of economics at Howard University, also spoke of the transformative effect the civil rights laws had on expanding employment opportunities, particularly in the south, where African Americans were finally able to obtain higher-paying jobs in manufacturing. Despite the progress that has been made, overall unemployment for African Americans still is double today what it is for whites. He pointed out that, at the start of the 21st century, more college degrees in computer science were awarded to African American than whites; however, during the downturn in the economy, in 2008-09, when African Americans lost computer-related jobs, almost 750,000 H1-B visas were issued, mostly in the fields of computer science, to bring in workers from overseas, contributing to black unemployment.

Source: EEOC

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

 

Swissport Fueling to Pay $250,000 to Settle EEOC Race and National Origin Harassment Lawsuit

African Fuelers at Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport Were Repeatedly Called 'Monkeys' By a Phoenix Swissport Manager, Federal Agency Charged

 

Swissport Fueling, Inc., which fuels aircraft at Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport, will pay $250,000 and furnish other relief to settle a lawsuit for race and national origin harassment filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced.

The EEOC's lawsuit was brought to obtain relief for fuelers who were from various African nations, including Sudan, Nigeria, Ghana and Sierra Leone. The lawsuit alleges that a Swissport manager routinely called the African fuelers "monkeys." According to the allegations, a Swissport manager called the fuelers "monkeys" in a number of degrading ways:

• A Swissport manager called the fuelers "monkeys" in anger, such as "What are you doing here, monkeys?"
• A manager called at least one fueler "monkey" as a replacement for his name.
• A manager ridiculed the culture of the fuelers by making derogatory statements about the fuelers' lunches, describing the fuelers' food as "monkey soup."
• A manager made demeaning references to slavery to the fuelers. For example, a manager told them, for example, "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."

According to the allegations, the African fuelers reported the harassment verbally and in writing, including by signing a written petition and delivering it to the office of Swissport's general manager at the Phoenix facility to try to stop the harassment. The EEOC says that despite the fuelers' complaints, the abuse continued.

Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC filed suit, EEOC v. Swissport Fueling, Inc. (2:10-CV-02101-GMS), in U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.

In addition to the paying $250,000 to the African fuelers who allege they were subjected to the hostile work environment, Swissport also must provide training on harassment based upon race, national origin, and color to managers, supervisors, and human resource employees. Swissport is also required to implement policies prohibiting harassment based upon race, national origin, and color, and post a notice that harassment of Swissport's employees is unlawful and will not be tolerated.

"It is against federal civil rights laws for an employer to single out any group, including the immigrant community, by subjecting it to a hostile work environment based upon its national origin, race, and color," said Regional Attorney Mary Jo O'Neill of the EEOC's Phoenix District Office. "Employers have a responsibility to take prompt, corrective action when they learn of such abuse. The action taken must remedy the harassment that already has occurred, stop the misconduct and prevent future abuse."

EEOC's Phoenix District Director Rayford Irvin said, "The EEOC will not tolerate harassment based upon race, national origin, and color. The word "monkey," which historically has been used as a highly demeaning racial slur, is especially unacceptable."

According to its website, Swissport provides fueling services at Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport, where it employs 160 people and has handled over 407 million gallons of fuel. Swissport's customers include Southwest Airlines, US Airways, AeroMexico, Delta Air Lines, American Airlines, Continental Airlines, United Airlines, FedEx and DHL.

Source: EEOC

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

Four Hawaii Farms Pays $2.4 Million To Settle National Origin and Retaliation Employment Discrimination Lawsuit

Additional Relief in the Form of Job Offers and Other Benefits Will Be Offered to Vulnerable Thai Laborers, Says Federal Agency

Three years after filing suit against farm labor contractor Global Horizons and six farms in Hawaii, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity announced the settlement of its pattern or practice national origin and race discrimination case with four farms - Mac Farms of Hawaii, LLC [nka MF Nut Co., LLC ("Mac Farms")], Kauai Coffee Company, Inc., [nka McBryde Resources, Inc. ("Kauai Coffee")], Kelena Farms, Inc. and Captain Cook Coffee Company, Ltd. The settlement encompasses monetary relief, options for jobs and benefits, housing, other reimbursements of expenses, and sweeping injunctive relief remedies benefitting about 500 Thai victims in the EEOC's case. This includes nearly 50 potential job offers.


In March 2014, U.S. District Judge Leslie E. Kobayashi in Hawaii ruled that Beverly Hills-based Global Horizons is liable for the pattern or practice of harassing, discriminating, and retaliating against hundreds of Thai farm workers in the U.S. based on their national origin and race, in violation of federal anti-discrimination laws. The EEOC named the farms in Hawaii as defendants asserting that they were joint employers with the labor contractor, and liable due to the acts committed by Global Horizons. Global Horizons and Maui Pineapple Company remain as the only defendants left in the case.


Phirom Krinsoongnoen, one of the affected Thai farm workers, said, "We worked and lived under terrible conditions, treated like animals in a cage.  We were housed in an overcrowded place with a few rooms but many workers, and threatened almost daily.  I am grateful that the EEOC is here to help people like me."


The EEOC alleged that Thai farm workers were contracted through Global Horizons to work at the farms sometime between 2003 and 2007 under the H2-A temporary visa program which required the farm workers to be provided food and housing aside from pay for work performed. Exorbitant recruitment fees placed the Thai workers into a situation of debt bondage early on. Workers were then subjected to varying degrees of the denial or delay of pay, monitoring movements and confiscating passports, production quotas that non-Thai workers need not adhere to, denial of adequate food and water, and unsanitary, overcrowded living conditions. Those who complained of the pattern or practice of discrimination and harassment were retaliated against, with many forced to quit or flee as a result.


"This resolution reflects the Commission's redoubled effort to challenge discriminatory practices against the most vulnerable workers who often live and work in the shadows of the economy," said EEOC General Counsel David Lopez. "This case strikes a blow at one of the root causes of human trafficking - discrimination based on prohibited bases."


The alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. As part of the four consent decrees finalized today, Mac Farms will pay $1.6 million, Kauai Coffee will pay $425,000, Kelena Farms will pay $275,000 and Captain Cook Coffee will pay $100,000 directly to the victims. As such, the total direct monetary relief recovered is $2.4 million. In addition, Kelena Farms offered full-time jobs with generous benefits, profit-sharing & 401K plan options, while Captain Cook Coffee offered seasonal jobs, benefits, transportation and housing for workers during the term of their decrees. The offers extended by Kelena and Captain Cook, valued at nearly $4.9 million, add to the direct monetary settlements over the duration of the consent decrees. The EEOC will monitor the terms of the job offers.


Sweeping injunctive relief in all of these consent decrees will ensure that farms and farm labor contractors (FLCs) disseminate policies and procedures prohibiting discrimination to their local work force and to H2-A guest workers in a language they understand; conduct audits to ensure FLC compliance with the consent decree; designate a corporate compliance officer for oversight of FLCs and Title VII compliance; train managers, supervisors, and employees on their obligations under Title VII; and, report to the EEOC and maintain records.


"Today's announcement serves as a reminder to the agricultural industry to remain ever-vigilant in hiring and monitoring farm labor contractors," said Anna Y. Park, regional attorney for the EEOC's Los Angeles District. "We all have a responsibility to ensure that the most vulnerable workers are not denied basic human dignity and life-sustaining water and food. Farms and farm labor contractors - and the supervisors that represent them - must ensure workers' civil rights remain intact, no matter their race or the country they come from."


The lawsuit in Hawaii was initially filed in April 2011 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii (EEOC v. Global Horizons, Inc. d/b/a Global Horizons Manpower, Inc., Captain Cook Coffee Co., Ltd., Del Monte Fresh Produce (Hawaii), Inc., Kauai Coffee Company, Inc., Kelena Farms, Inc., Mac Farms of Hawaii, LLC, Maui Pineapple Co., et al, Case No. CV-11-00257-LEK-RLP). Del Monte Farm Fresh already settled for $1.2 million in November 2013.


The trial against Global Horizons in Hawaii is now set for November 18 to determine the amount of money the company will pay as well as the measures required to prevent future abuses. The case against Maui Pineapple Company - the only Hawaii farm left in the case - is ongoing.


Source: EEOC

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

Del Monte Fresh Produce Agrees to Settle EEOC Farmworker National Origin Lawsuit

Federal Agency Alleged Thai Farm Workers Were Subjected to Discrimination on Hawaii Farm

 

Del Monte Fresh Produce, one of the country's leading producers of fresh fruit and vegetables, has agreed to settle a discrimination lawsuit filed in Hawaii against its Hawaii subsidiary by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced.

As part of the settlement, Del Monte Fresh Produce will pay $1.2 million to be distributed to the Thai claimants in the EEOC's case. In addition, Del Monte Fresh Produce has partnered with the EEOC to champion and ensure equal employment rights and opportunities by setting an example for the U.S. farming industry.

"I am pleased the parties were able to resolve this case without resorting to prolonged and expensive litigation," said EEOC General Counsel David Lopez. "We are hopeful that this resolution will provide a model for the agricultural industry to ensure that farm contractors comply with anti-discrimination laws."

Specifically, Del Monte Fresh Produce has agreed to institute comprehensive protocols and accountability measures to ensure that all farm labor contractors that work with Del Monte Fresh Produce comply with federal laws against discrimination and retaliation. This is the first effort of its kind for a farm to ensure farm labor contractor accountability for federal anti-discrimination laws.
Among other things, Del Monte Fresh Produce has agreed to:

• Establish procedures to ensure that farm labor contractors (FLCs) disseminate policies and procedures prohibiting discrimination to their local work force and to H2-A guest workers in a language they understand;
• Establish mechanisms for FLCs to provide notices to workers about their rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964;
• Disseminate notices to all workers, including FLC and Del Monte Fresh Produce employees alike, on methods for submitting discrimination complaints;
• Conduct audits to ensure FLC compliance with the consent decree throughout its term;
• Designate a compliance officer for oversight of FLC compliance and Title VII compliance as required under the consent decree;
• Train managers, supervisors, and employees on their obligations under Title VII; and
• Report to the EEOC and keep records.

Del Monte Fresh Produce's Hawaii subsidiary is one of the first farms to resolve its case with the EEOC. The EEOC originally filed suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii in April 2011, charging that Global Horizons, a labor contractor responsible for recruiting the Thai workers, and various farm defendants engaged in conduct that constituted national origin and race discrimination, harassment and retaliation in their treatment of farm workers recruited from Thailand from 2003 through 2006. Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In its suit (EEOC v. Global Horizons, Inc. d/b/a Global Horizons Manpower, Inc., Case No. CV-11-00257-LEK-RLP), the EEOC named not only the recruitment company, Global Horizons, but also the following six farms in Hawaii: Del Monte Fresh Produce's Hawaii subsidiary; Captain Cook Coffee Company, Kauai Coffee Company, Kelena Farms, MacFarms of Hawaii, and Maui Pineapple Farms.

The EEOC named Del Monte Fresh Produce's Hawaii subsidiary, which contracted with Global for approximately three years ending in 2005 to tend pineapple fields the subsidiary leased on the island of Oahu. For its service obligations to the subsidiary, Global hired farm laborers that it trained and supervised. Those workers brought in from Thailand and placed at the various farms, the EEOC charged, were mistreated and discriminated against by Global on the subsidiary's farm.

"We commend Del Monte Fresh Produce for taking a bold step to holding farm labor contractors accountable and to show its commitment to ensuring farm workers are treated with dignity and protected under federal anti-discrimination laws," said Anna Y. Park, regional attorney for the EEOC's Los Angeles District Office, which includes the state of Hawaii in its jurisdiction. "We hope this is wake-up call for others in the agricultural industry to follow Del Monte Fresh Produce's lead in recognizing signs of potential abuses by farm labor contractors and taking proactive steps to hold them accountable."

Source: EEOC

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

EEOC Meeting Highlights Challenges to Title VII National Origin Enforcement

Growing Immigrant and Ethnic Populations Require Nuanced Approaches to Enforcement of Anti-Discrimination Laws, Panel of Experts Tells Commission

 

The diversity, size and cultural individuality of different ethnic and immigrant groups present challenges to compliance with and enforcement of the nation's anti-discrimination in employment laws, a panel of experts told members of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) at a public meeting held today. The panelists represented diverse stakeholders, including EEOC employees, representatives of major ethnic advocacy groups and management-side attorneys.

"The U.S. labor force is dynamic, diverse and multi-cultural," said EEOC Chair Jacqueline Berrien. "In prohibiting discrimination based on national origin, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 seeks to ensure that all individuals have equal employment opportunities, and that employers - and the national economy as a whole - can take advantage of the full range of the skills and talents they have to offer. This meeting provides the Commission with the opportunity to consider how we can best advance our mission to stop and remedy unlawful discrimination based on national origin."

National origin discrimination is different from other forms of discrimination because it involves not only a person's place of birth or origin of ancestors, but also cultural or linguistic characteristics, according to panelist Rebecca Smith, Deputy Director of the National Employment Law Project.

While individuals who speak up about discrimination face the same sorts of retaliation as others, for certain immigrants there is the additional "devastating" use of the "deportation card"-when individuals are threatened with deportation or examination of their immigration status as a threat to keep them from complaining about discrimination, Smith noted, a problem that was also mentioned by Thomas Saenz, President and General Counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF).

"National origin discrimination--whether it takes the form of harassment against farm workers, segregation of Vietnamese workers in lower-paying factory jobs, or not hiring a qualified applicant from Iran because she didn't conform to a retailer's preferred image--should be tackled through coordinated enforcement, outreach, and training efforts" said Commissioner Jenny R. Yang who helped organize the meeting. "We are confident that the Commission will benefit from the information obtained today."

Many panelists highlighted the growing percentage of immigrants in the workforce, as well as the dispersion of immigrant populations from traditional centers in the Southwest, West and a few large cities in the East and Midwest, to smaller cities throughout the U.S. which have seen their immigrant populations double and triple in the past twenty years.

In addition to its litigation efforts, the EEOC has many tools to combat national origin discrimination, Lucila Rosas, Lead Coordinator of the EEOC's Immigrant Worker Team, told the Commission. These include a Spanish-language website and Twitter feed, fact sheets and other materials in Arabic, Chinese, Haitian-Creole, Korean, Russian, Spanish and Vietnamese, and bi-lingual employees throughout the country, speaking languages most commonly found in the geographic area.

The multi-cultural workplace presents challenges for employers, Douglas Farmer, an attorney representing management, testified. Cultural norms in an employee's background may make it difficult for a man to accept supervision from a woman for example. Farmer cited the need for extensive education about both rights and responsibilities under the law. He suggested that the EEOC develop training modules in a variety of languages as well as a model anti-harassment policy, and make them available on its website for employers to download.

The Commission will hold open the National Origin Commission meeting record for 15 days, and invites audience members, as well as other members of the public, to submit written comments on any issues or matters discussed at the meeting. Public comments may be mailed to Commission Meeting, EEOC Executive Officer, 131 M Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20507, or e-mailed to: Commissionmeetingcomments@eeoc.gov.

The comments submitted will be made available to members of the Commission and to Commission staff working on the matters discussed at the meeting. In addition, comments may be disclosed to the public. By providing comments in response to this solicitation, commenters are consenting to their use and consideration by the Commission and to their public dissemination. Accordingly, those submitting comments should not include any information that they would not want made public, e.g., home address, telephone number, etc. Also note that when comments are submitted by e-mail, the sender's e-mail address automatically appears on the message.

Source: EEOC

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