Each month, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) files lawsuits and settles cases covering the federal laws they are responsible for enforcing. These federal laws include:
- Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII)
- The Pregnancy Discrimination Act
- The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act of 2022 (PWFA)
- The Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA)
- The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA)
- Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA)
- Sections 102 and 103 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991
- Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
- The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA)
Below is a list of lawsuits and settlements by the EEOC in from June 1 to June 15, 2024.
- EEOC Lawsuits
- EEOC Settlements
- Pacific Culinary and CB Foods to Pay $245,000 in EEOC Sexual Harassment and Retaliation Lawsuit
- Res-Care / Equus to Pay $125,000 in EEOC High-Risk Pregnancy and Disability Discrimination Case
- Honolulu Restaurant and HR Company to Pay $115,000 in EEOC Sexual Harassment Lawsuit
- Factor One Source Pharmacy to Pay $515,000 to Settle EEOC Disability and Genetic Information Discrimination Suit
EEOC Lawsuits
EEOC Sues Two Employers for Sex Discrimination
Allegations
Sex discrimination
Laws Involved
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
State
Alabama
Summary
According to the Alabama lawsuit, Harmony fired a night auditor after management observed him styled and dressed in a manner they perceived to be feminine and that differed from management’s preferred appearance for male employees.
EEOC Sues Two Employers for Sex Discrimination
Allegations
Sex discrimination
Laws Involved
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
State
Illinois
Summary
The agency alleges that the employee was harassed, including being subject to the frequent use of gay slurs, because of his perceived feminine style of dress, speech and mannerisms. The agency claims that the company ignored the employee’s complaints and did nothing to stop the harassment by various managers and employees.
EEOC Settlements
Pacific Culinary and CB Foods to Pay $245,000 in EEOC Sexual Harassment and Retaliation Lawsuit
Allegations
Sexual harassment; Retaliation; Constructive Discharge
Laws Involved
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
State
California
Summary
The lawsuit alleged that the companies’ chief operating officer sexually harassed male and female employees. The harassment included, but was not limited to, frequent and offensive groping and touching; unwelcome sexual advances and comments about their appearances; and inappropriate questions about employees’ sexual preferences and sexual activities.
Res-Care / Equus to Pay $125,000 in EEOC High-Risk Pregnancy and Disability Discrimination Case
Allegations
Disability Discrimination; Pregnancy Discrimination
Laws Involved
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
State
New Mexico
Summary
According to the EEOC lawsuit, Res-Care knew about Cheyenne Benavidez’s high-risk pregnancy and associated disabilities, failed to provide disability accommodations, and later fired her for attending a pregnancy and disability-related appointment with a medical specialist.
Honolulu Restaurant and HR Company to Pay $115,000 in EEOC Sexual Harassment Lawsuit
Allegations
Sexual Harassment
Laws Involved
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
State
Hawaii
Summary
According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, Aged Artisans’ co-owner targeted gay employees for sexual harassment by exposing his genitals in the workplace, asking for oral sex and making repeated sexual comments related to the male employees’ sexual orientation. Aged Artisans/Surfeit Group and their outsourced HR company, ALTRES, failed to conduct an adequate investigation, thereby allowing the harassment to continue unabated.
Factor One Source Pharmacy to Pay $515,000 to Settle EEOC Disability and Genetic Information Discrimination Suit
Allegations
Sexual Harassment
Laws Involved
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA)
State
Colorado
Summary
Factor One unlawfully asked applicants about their hemophilia, their children’s hemophilia, and the medications they or their children took so it could recruit individuals who had hemophilia or had family members with hemophilia. To increase its profits, Factor One would unlawfully pressure employees to use its pharmacy services for the expensive medications needed to treat hemophilia, the EEOC alleged. Employees who refused were fired or laid off, while employees who used Factor One’s pharmacy for hemophilia medications kept their jobs, even if they had worse performance reviews than employees who were let go.
