Positive Discrimination Legal Cases

Positive Discrimination Legal Cases

In June 2015, Dollar General Corporation contributed $32,500 and provided additional assistance to resolve an EEOC racial discrimination lawsuit. In its lawsuit, the EEOC alleged that Dollar General refused at least three times to promote a black employee because of her run for a vacant position as assistant store manager at its Long Beach, Mississippi store. The EEOC said it had expressed interest in a promotion and had considerable qualifications, but Dollar General hired less qualified white candidates. The lawsuit further alleged that Dollar General subjected the Black employee to increasing hostility and discipline after she complained about unequal treatment. The company denied the allegations in court. The court dismissed Dollar General`s request for summary judgment, and the parties ultimately signed 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 reported promptly. and be examined. EEOC v Dolgencorp, LLC d/b/a Dollar General, No. 1: 13-cv-00383-LG-JCG (N.D. Miss.

June 11, 2015). In this case, this is not the exception of “general affirmative action”, which is often invoked by employers to help underrepresented groups and encourage them to apply for jobs (for example, through additional training or mentoring for these groups). The Supreme Court issued a landmark affirmative action decision under the Equality Act 2010 (“EqA”), which found that it was legal for a housing association to provide public housing only to members of an Orthodox Jewish community under sections 158 and 193 of the EQA. How can positive discrimination be combated? Diversity takes time to achieve something. This cannot be achieved simply by filling the required quotas with people who have protected property. Measures should be taken to ensure fair treatment of all applicants and workers. Above all, positive steps can be taken to promote diversity. In July 2017, the largest farmed shellfish producer in the United States paid $160,000 and made other facilities to settle an EEOC lawsuit. According to the EEOC lawsuit, a black maintenance mechanic at Taylor Shellfish`s Samish Bay farm faced repeated humiliating comments about his race, including the use of the “N-word,” “haunted,” and “boy.” His direct superior commented that his father had driven “your kind” out of town. When the mechanic reported this behaviour to management, the supervisor retaliated against him and Taylor Shellfish simply advised him to “put his head down and do what he was told.” After being wrongly accused and punished for insubordination, he felt he had no choice but to quit his job. As part of the consent decree to resolve this case, Taylor Shellfish agreed to implement new policies, provide comprehensive training to employees and management, post a notice of non-discrimination in the workplace, and report compliance with the EEOC for a period of three years. EEOC v Taylor Shellfish Company, Inc., 2:16-CV-01517 (W.D.

Wash, 2017, 31 July). The case concerns German civil servant Hellmut Marschall, who sued the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia for alleged sex discrimination when he failed to obtain the promotion he considered deserved. In June 2015, Pioneer Hotel, Inc. in Laughlin, Nevada, agreed to pay $150,000 and provide other remedies to resolve an EEOC lawsuit for discrimination based on national origin and color. The EEOC denounced the fact that a category of Latin American and/or brown-skinned workers had been the subject of a flood of highly offensive and derogatory comments about their national origin and/or skin color since at least 2006. In particular, housekeeping and security employees were constantly subjected to insults from several superiors and employees. In addition, the EEOC claimed that Latino/brown-skinned workers were instructed not to speak Spanish during their breaks. Pioneer has failed to stop and correct harassment and discrimination despite repeated complaints from Latino/brown-skinned workers.

Pioneer signed a four-year consent decree prohibiting Pioneer from creating, facilitating, or enabling a hostile work environment for Latino or darker-skinned employees. In addition, the hotel has agreed to hire an external equal 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 duties under Title VII; be required to report complaints to the human resources department without delay; the creation of a centralized complaints system; and be held responsible for failure to take appropriate action. The declaration of consent will be posted prominently in the hotel. EEOC v Pioneer Hotel, Inc. d/b/a Pioneer Hotel and Gambling Hall, Case No. 2:11-cv-01588-LRH-GWF (d. Nev. settlement June 18, 2015). Affirmative action may consist of offering a job to a candidate, not because he or she is the best candidate for the job, but only because he or she has a certain protected characteristic (e.g. race, sex, sexual orientation, disability). It is illegal.

In December 2012, a factory in South Dallas, Texas, agreed to pay $500,000 to a class of 14 black employees to settle an EEOC racial discrimination lawsuit alleging that the plant subjected black employees to violent, racist graffiti and racial slurs from co-workers such as “KKK.” swastikas, Confederate flags, “white power” and other racist terms. including “Die, N—-R, Die” as well as posting traps in an employee`s workplace. Black employees claimed that supervisors continued the behaviour uncontrollably. The consent decree permanently prohibits the company from discriminating against employees on the basis of race and requires the company to issue an anti-graffiti policy and submit to two years of annual audits of its compliance with EEOC v. Rock-Tenn Services Co., No. 3: 10-cv-01960 (ND Tex. filed September 29, 2012). In September 2013, a Kentucky mining company paid a total of $245,000 to a total of 19 applicants and changed its hiring practices to resolve an EEOC racial discrimination lawsuit. River View Coal LLC, a division of Alliance Resource Partners LP, must also regularly report on its hiring practices to the EEOC for two years to avoid trial alleging that the company had refused to hire a class of African-American candidates for mining jobs at its Waverly, Kentucky, site since 2008.