Plaintiff, a Trinidadian man, was hired and later promoted to Associate Controller of the Contracts and Grants Department at FIU.   In this position, plaintiff was responsible for overseeing compliance with federal accounting regulations for federal grants awarded to FIU faculty.  In 2003, FIU was fined $11.5 million for violations of federal accounting regulations that were discovered in an audit of research grants awarded to FIU faculty members.  As a consequence of the federal audit and resulting fine, FIU reorganized its research grant structure, eliminated plaintiff’s department and position, and created a new department.  Upon learning that his position was being eliminated, plaintiff complained of race discrimination to his supervisor and FIU’s Assistant Vice President of Human Resources.   Plaintiff applied for a position with the newly-formed department and, after an interview, the search committee did not recommend plaintiff for the new position.  Plaintiff’s supervisor and FIU’s Assistant Vice President of Human Resources did not participate in plaintiff’s interview and had no involvement in any decision regarding hiring plaintiff for the new position.  Plaintiff located other employment outside of FIU and resigned before his termination date.  The new position remained vacant for 19 months. Plaintiff filed suit against FIU, alleging racial discrimination for eliminating his position and retaliation for complaining about racial discrimination by not being recommended for the new position.  At trial, a jury returned a verdict in plaintiff’s favor, awarding him $72,241 in lost wages and $2.5 million in compensatory damages. 

The Florida Court of Appeal held that plaintiff was unable to establish a prima facie case of race discrimination under the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 (FCRA) pursuant to the framework set forth in McDonnell Douglas Corp v. Green.  The Court of Appeal held that plaintiff failed to present evidence that similarly situated employees outside of his protected class were treated more favorably.  Plaintiff argued that another employee, while her official title was different, her job responsibilities were equivalent to the new position and she was treated more favorably than plaintiff.  The Court of Appeal rejected this argument and stated that evidence of FIU hiring an employee outside of plaintiff’s protected class for the same position approximately 19 months after plaintiff applied for the position does not, without more, create an inference of discriminatory intent.  Similarly, the Court of Appeal held that plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation under the FCRA as he was unable to demonstrate any evidence that the search committee knew of his complaint of discrimination, and therefore, had cause to retaliate.       

To read the entire Court of Appeal decision, click here. 

UT – The state supreme court recently reversed a trial court’s dismissal of an intentional infliction of emotional distress suit for failure to state a claim.  In this case, the plaintiff alleged that his supervisor directed his co-workers to “waterboard” him during a work retreat (hold him down while his supervisor poured water over his nose and mouth).  The supreme court’s reversal was solely premised on the fact that the trial court failed to provide a reason for the dismissal.

MI – Consumers Energy asked a court to overturn an $8 million verdict in favor of an employee who sued the company for sexual harassment and hostile work environment.

PA – A non-profit organization was found guilty of race discrimination when it fired an African-American employee.  The Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission ordered the company to undergo non-discrimination training.

IA – A federal jury awarded a hotel employee $50,000 in a sex discrimination and retaliation suit against her employer.  The employee, who described herself as “slightly more masculine”, alleged she was fired for opposing the company’s sex stereotypes for their female employees.

VA – A federal jury returned a verdict in favor of the Chesterfield County school system in an age discrimination suit brought by a former director of community relations who alleged she was forced to resign and then replaced by her younger subordinate.  For our previous post on the court’s denial of the school’s motion for summary judgment, click here.

TX – A federal jury found that five of seven FMC Technologies employees were subject to a racially hostile work environment after nooses were found in the workplace.  The jury did not award any damages and was undecided on whether the company exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct the harassing behavior.

NJ – An appeals court upheld a trial court’s decision to dismiss a Perth Amboy police officer’s second lawsuit against his former chief for retaliation; a jury found in favor of the officer in his first lawsuit for national origin discrimination.

NY – The New York State Division of Human Rights adopted the administrative law judge’s recommendation and awarded $600,000 to a former contract partner at a law firm who alleged he had been fired because of his mental health problems.  The law firm stated that the lawyer’s termination was due to unusual charges on the firm’s credit card that he attempted to pass on to clients.

TN – The city of Chattanooga withdrew its appeal of a jury verdict in favor of two former police officers who alleged age discrimination after they were fired and replaced by younger officers.  The city agreed to pay the officers $840,000 in settlement of the appeal, almost $100,000 more than the jury verdict.

CA – Verizon Communications, Inc. agreed to settle a class action suit for over $6 million. The suit was brought on behalf of a class of employees who alleged that their rights were violated under the state’s family and medical leave act.  As part of the settlement, Verizon also agreed to revise its leave policies and train its managers and human resource personnel on the proper leave procedures under the law.

NC – A chicken processor, Mountaire Farms, Inc., agreed to pay $40,000 to settle a retaliation suit brought by the EEOC on behalf of a former employee who alleged she was given a negative performance evaluation and then fired in retaliation for complaining about racial discrimination by her supervisor.

HI – 7-Eleven of Hawaii will pay $10,000 to settle a disability discrimination suit and appeal.  The suit was brought on behalf of a former employee who alleged that confidential medical information was disclosed to a prospective employer, who later rescinded a job offer.

AZ – A truck stop agreed to pay $70,000 to settle a sexual harassment suit filed on behalf of two female employees who alleged they were repeatedly harassed by customers.

MD – Three property management companies will pay $106,500 to settle a national origin discrimination and retaliation suit filed on behalf of a group of Hispanic employees who alleged they were harassed and discriminated against by the companies, including being ordered to speak only English in the workplace.  Aside from the monetary relief, the consent decree includes injunctions against discrimination and mandatory anti-discrimination training, and states that employees will be permitted to speak languages other than English in the workplace, so long as it poses no “business hardship.”

TX – AT&T Services, Inc. agreed to settle a disability discrimination suit for $60,000.  The suit was brought on behalf of a job applicant who alleged he was not hired for a technician job because of his type 2 diabetes.

MN – An appliance manufacturer agreed to modify meal break schedules for Muslim employees as part of the settlement of a religious accommodation charge brought by a group of employees who requested an accommodation for the observation of Ramadan.

KY – The owner and operator of a Pizza Hut agreed to settle a pregnancy and disability discrimination suit filed on behalf of a pregnant employee who alleged that the company disclosed her medical information with co-workers, reduced her work hours, and discharged her because of her pregnancy and in retaliation for complaining about the discrimination.  The settlement consists of back pay and a neutral employment reference for the employee.

CA – An aircraft services provider agreed to pay $600,000 to settle a national origin, race, and sex harassment suit brought on behalf of a group of male employees who alleged they were subject to harassing comments concerning their national origin, as well as sexually harassed, by a male co-worker who was subsequently promoted to a supervisory position.

TX – The owners and producers of the television show “Cheaters” paid $50,000 to settle a sexual harassment suit brought on behalf of two female office assistants who alleged they were subject to sexual harassment by the owner and managers. 

NY – A roofing company agreed to pay $1 million to settle a race discrimination suit brought on behalf of a group of African-American employees who alleged they were subject to a pattern of racial harassment and disparate treatment in job assignments and promotions because of their race.

MD – Axiom staffing will pay $35,000 to settle a disability discrimination suit brought on behalf of an applicant who alleged the company refused to place her because of her back impairment.

OK – A pizza restaurant agreed to pay $40,000 to settle a sexual harassment suit brought on behalf of a female employee who alleged she was sexually harassed by the manager.

NC – A construction company will pay $30,000 to settle a race harassment and retaliation suit brought on behalf of an African-American employee who alleged he was harassed because of his race and then discharged for complaining about it.

TN – Paramount Staffing, Inc. agreed to a $585,000 settlement in a race and national origin discrimination suit filed on behalf of a class of African Americans who alleged they were not placed into warehouse positions because of their race, and that Hispanic workers were preferred for the positions.

TX – Finch Air Conditioning and Heating, Inc. will pay $80,000 to settle a sexual harassment and constructive discharge suit brought on behalf of a group of female employees who alleged they were subject to sexual harassment by the owner.

GA – A cleaning service company agreed to pay $25,000 to settle a gender discrimination suit brought on behalf of a female supervisor who alleged she was fired because her manager wanted a male supervisor instead.

D.C. – Andre Chreky, a high-end hairstylist, agreed to settle a sexual harassment claim brought by a former employee for $7 million.  Chreky was involved in another sexual harassment suit by another employee which resulted in a $2.3 million verdict against Chreky.  Chreky is currently involved in bankruptcy proceedings.

AL – In a race discrimination case initiated in 1996, the 11th Circuit affirmed its previous ruling that the term “boy” is not by itself evidence of racial discrimination.  The case had gone through two jury trials that resulted in verdicts of over $1million for the plaintiff, a former employee of Tyson Foods who alleged he was denied a promotion because of his race.  The U.S. Supreme Court reviewed the court of appeals’ first decision and stated that although the court may have reached the right result, the meaning behind the term at issue may not always be benign depending on the context, tone of voice, inflection, etc.  Nevertheless, the 11th Circuit reinstated its previous holding that usage of the term was “non-racial in context.”

MA – A jury returned a verdict in favor of the school district in an age discrimination suit brought by a former baseball and football coach.  The long-time coach alleged that he was not rehired because of his age; the school district asserted that his termination was due in part to alleged confrontations between the coach and staffers of a local minor league baseball team.

CA – In a case of strange irony, a former Playboy TV employee was awarded $182,500 in compensatory damages and $10,000 in punitive damages after a jury concluded that she had been sexually harassed by a co-worker.

MI – A federal jury returned a $115,000 award in favor of a group of female tenants who alleged they were sexually harassed by their housing manager.

CA – A jury awarded more than $2 million to a former card dealer who alleged she was sexually harassed by her supervisor and then retaliated against after she reported the conduct.  Jottings By An Employer’s Lawyer has a post about the case here, in which he points out that the jury awarded the plaintiff 2/3 of the company’s net worth.

CA – A jury found in favor of a lawyer who was sued by his former paralegal for sexual harassment and wrongful termination.  The jury awarded the lawyer $1.55 million in damages in his defamation counter-suit.

CA – A Korea-based food company and owner of a Los Angeles restaurant agreed to pay $170,000 to settle a sexual harassment suit brought by the EEOC on behalf of a class of female employees who alleged they were harassed by their manager.

AL – A truck transportation company will pay $100,000 to settle a race discrimination and retaliation suit filed on behalf of a group of employees who alleged they were subject to a racially hostile work environment and then retaliated against when they complained about the discrimination.

IL – Silgan Containers Manufacturing Corporation agreed to pay $45,000 to settle a race discrimination suit brought on behalf of a former employee who alleged he was fired because of his race after only one month on the job.

MO – A billboard company will pay $55,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation suit filed on behalf of a female employee who alleged she was subject to sexual harassment by her manager, and then fired after she complained about the conduct.

TN – Terminix International agreed to an $80,000 settlement in a sex discrimination suit brought on behalf of a former employee who alleged she was fired because she was pregnant.  The company had granted the employee medical restrictions for six weeks before terminating her employment.

MI – A health services provider agreed to pay $45,000 to settle a disability discrimination suit brought on behalf of an employee who alleged she was discriminated against because of her history of depression.  The company had granted the employee a leave of absence but then refused to allow her to return to work.

NM – A staffing firm will pay $62,500 to settle a retaliation suit brought by the EEOC on behalf of a former office supervisor who alleged he was fired for supporting a sexual harassment complaint made by a female employee.

TX – A Sears store agreed to pay $30,000 to settle an age discrimination suit filed on behalf of a 61‑year‑old job applicant who alleged he was refused a position because of his age.

IL – Jerseyville Elks Lodge will pay $107,500 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation suit brought on behalf of three female bartenders who alleged they were sexually harassed and then retaliated against when they complained about the conduct.

MD – A transcription company agreed to a $30,000 settlement in a disability discrimination suit brought on behalf of a part-time employee with multiple sclerosis who alleged she was denied a full-time position because of her disability.

KY – A hotel managing company will pay $40,000 to settle a religious discrimination suit brought on behalf of four female employees who alleged that the company failed to provide an accommodation by not allowing them to wear their hijab to work.

PA – A farm growers’ cooperative agreed to pay $300,000 to settle a sex and national origin discrimination and retaliation suit brought on behalf of a class of female farmworkers who alleged they were subject to harassment by male coworkers and then retaliated against when they complained about the treatment.

OH – A temporary agency agreed to a $650,000 settlement in a class discrimination suit brought by the EEOC alleging that the company had engaged in discriminatory practices by profiling job applicants on the basis of race, sex, age, and national origin.  The suit also alleged that the company complied with discriminatory requests made by its clients, and unlawfully fired employees who opposed the discriminatory practices and participated in the EEOC’s investigation.

CA – Hilltown Packing Company will pay $48,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation suit filed on behalf of a group of female employees who alleged they were harassed by their supervisor and then retaliated against for opposing the harassment.

MA – A national denture provider will pay $150,000 to settle a sex and race discrimination suit brought by the EEOC on behalf of two female employees who alleged they were harassed by an affiliated dentist.

PA – A temporary staffing company agreed to pay $12,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation suit brought on behalf of a group of female employees who alleged they were subject to harassment by a male supervisor at an assigned work location. 

MD – An aircraft systems company agreed to a $130,000 settlement in an age discrimination suit brought on behalf of a 61-year-old employee who alleged he received poor performance reviews and was refused a promotion because of his age.

MN – A federal district court ruled in favor of the EEOC on the employer’s summary judgment motion in a disability discrimination suit.  The court found that there was an issue of fact on whether a job applicant who was deaf could have performed the job with a reasonable accommodation, especially in light of the fact that the applicant had previously performed that same type of work.

CA – A motorcycle dealership will pay $55,000 to settle a sex discrimination and retaliation suit brought on behalf of a female employee who alleged she was refused a position as a mechanic while the company hired less qualified men as mechanics.

MI – An automotive supplier has agreed to pay $190,000 to settle a race discrimination and retaliation suit brought on behalf of a group of minority employees who alleged they were denied promotions.

GA – A staffing company will pay $125,000 to settle a race and age discrimination suit brought on behalf of an employee who alleged she was discriminated against because of her race and age and then fired in retaliation after she complained about it.

AZ – A packaging manufacturer will pay $250,000 to settle an age discrimination suit brought on behalf of three former employees who alleged they were fired because of their age.

FL – Avea Drug Delivery Systems agreed to pay $58,000 to settle a disability discrimination suit brought on behalf of a former employee with renal disease who alleged she was fired upon returning from a medical leave of absence.

FL – Hilton Grand Vacations will pay $25,000 to settle a pregnancy discrimination suit brought on behalf of a former employee who alleged she was persuaded to resign her employment because of pregnancy-related complications and then not rehired, contrary to the company’s promise to rehire her after she gave birth.

AZ – Yuma Oak Tree Inn agreed to pay $75,000 to settle a religious discrimination suit brought on behalf of former employees who alleged they were forced to engage in a religious prayer ceremony despite their different religious beliefs.

AK – Starbucks will pay $80,000 to settle a disability discrimination suit brought on behalf of a job applicant with multiple sclerosis who alleged he was not hired because of his disability.

TX – Two Sonic franchises agreed to pay $55,000 to settle a sexual harassment suit brought on behalf of female employees who alleged they were harassed by their managers.

IL – A nationwide staffing company will pay $100,000 to settle a disability discrimination suit brought on behalf of a blind female employee who alleged that her job offer was revoked when the company learned of her disability.

NC – A scrap metal processing company agreed to settle an age discrimination suit for $10,000 brought on behalf of a 76-year-old man who alleged he was passed up for a position because of his age.

CA – A construction company will pay $50,000 to settle a national origin discrimination suit brought on behalf of a group of Hispanic workers who alleged they were subject to verbal harassment by their supervisor.

MS – A plastic molding company agreed to pay $190,000 to settle a sexual harassment suit brought on behalf of female employees who alleged they were harassed by a male supervisor and co-worker.

MD – The Community College of Baltimore County will pay $50,000 to settle an age discrimination suit brought on behalf of an employee who alleged she was not hired for a position because of her age.

AZ – An oral surgery clinic will pay $118,775 to settle a pregnancy discrimination suit brought on behalf of a female employee who alleged she was fired because she was pregnant, and another employee who alleged she was not hired after the company learned she was pregnant during an interview.

GA – A home builder agreed to a $378,500 settlement in a race and sex discrimination suit brought on behalf of a group of African-American sales agents who alleged they were discriminated against with respect to their compensation because of their race.  As part of the settlement, the builder also agreed to hire at least ten African-Americans and women into management positions over a six year period.

TX – Cinram Wireless will pay $40,000 to settle a religious discrimination and retaliation suit brought on behalf a former employee who alleged the company failed to accommodate her Sabbath, and then fired her in retaliation for complaining about it.

CO – PETCO agreed to pay $145,000 to settle a disability discrimination suit brought on behalf of a deaf pet groomer who alleged she was penalized during performance reviews because of her disability.

GA – State and county government agencies will pay $60,000 to settle an age discrimination suit brought on behalf of a former employee who alleged she was fired because of her age.

D.C. – A group of police officers were awarded $900,000 in a suit against the police department alleging they were retaliated against for filing a racial discrimination complaint.  The Washington Post has a story about it here.

CA – A jury awarded $159,000 to a former state agency supervisor who was terminated for reporting sexual harassment against female coworkers.

CA – A federal appeals court granted a new trial on punitive damages to a former employee who won a $2.45 million punitive damages award in a hostile work environment suit against her former company.  The trial court had reduced the award to $300,000 per the federal damages cap, but the appeals court held that punitive damages should have been determined in accordance with California law, which has no statutory cap for punitives.

NY – Drug-maker Novartis agreed to pay $152.5 million to settle a gender discrimination class action that resulted in a $250 million punitive damages award in district court.

CO – A federal appeals court upheld a $33,758 judgment against the city of Cordell in a sex discrimination suit brought by a woman who alleged she was discriminated against when she was not rehired as an animal control officer after being laid-off.

NY – The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment for the employer in a race discrimination and retaliation brought by a former employee who alleged she was discriminated against with respect to training and performance evaluations.  The court found that the plaintiff had failed to provide sufficient evidence of discrimination.  In addition, the court held that the company’s alleged failure to investigate a discrimination complaint did not constitute an “adverse employment action” for purposes of a retaliation claim based on the filing of the same discrimination complaint. 

RI – A state court judge overturned a jury verdict that found in favor of a man who claimed he was not hired for two teaching jobs because of his age.

PR – The First Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a jury verdict that found in favor of a Postal Service employee who alleged sex discrimination and retaliation.  The court held that temporary rotation of an employee’s job duties, selective enforcement of a break policy, and alteration of rest days in a job posting were not “adverse employment actions” for purposes of a discrimination or retaliation claim.

TX – The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the lower court’s grant of summary judgment for Southwest Airlines in a disability discrimination case, holding that a reasonable jury could have concluded that the plaintiff was an individual with a disability under the ADA, that he was qualified for the position, and that he was terminated because of his disability. 

CA – A jury awarded a police officer $2 million in a retaliation suit against the city that alleged that the officer was retaliated against after he filed a complaint against his supervisor.

TX – A jury awarded a physician $3.6 million in a race and religious discrimination suit that he brought against the hospital alleging that he was subject to discriminatory comments by another physician.

MS – A nursing home will pay $40,000 to settle an age and race discrimination suit brought on behalf of a job applicant who alleged she was denied a position because of her age and race.

NC – Perdue Farms, Inc., agreed to pay $25,500 to settle an age discrimination suit brought on behalf of a job applicant who alleged she was denied the position because of her age.

GA – A contract security company has agreed to a $49,000 settlement in a religious discrimination suit brought on behalf of a former security guard who alleged that the company fired her instead of accommodating her practice of wearing a head scarf.

MO – A construction company will pay $15,000 to settle a race harassment suit brought on behalf of three construction workers who alleged they were subject to racial harassment on the job and then retaliated against for complaining about it.

TX – Two transportation brokerage companies agreed to pay $50,000 to settle a retaliation suit brought on behalf of a former employee who alleged he was fired for complaining about inappropriate jokes and comments by coworkers in the workplace.

AZ – A disability services company will pay $110,000 to settle a retaliation suit brought on behalf of two former employees who alleged they were retaliated against for filing a discrimination charge and participating in the investigation related to the charge.

MA – A national denture provider agreed to a $150,000 settlement in a sex and race discrimination suit brought on behalf of two former employees who alleged they were subject to sexual and racial harassment by a dentist affiliated with the company.

In determining the amount of the award, the judge instructed the jury to consider the “offensiveness of Novartis’ behavior, the nature and extent of the harm done, the length of time the class endured the behavior, the extent to which Novartis knew about the discrimination and how they reacted once they were on notice,” as well as the company’s financial condition.  Each of the 5,600 members of the class could receive up to $300,000 in damages, potentially increasing the company’s liability by hundreds of millions of dollars.  The plaintiffs also plan on seeking back pay damages in the amount of $37 million.  The suit is the largest discrimination matter to ever be tried in the country so far.  Novartis has stated that it plans on appealing the verdict, and stands behind its policies that set “the highest standards with regards to diversity and inclusion for the development of our employees.”

The class certification order can be found here.

 Articles on this case: 

 http://blogs.wsj.com/juggle/2010/05/21/novartis-ruling-offers-lesson-on-family-friendly-workplaces/

 http://www.inc.com/news/articles/2010/05/novartis-gender-bias-case-opens-door-for-more-lawsuits.html

 http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/may/21/novartis-hit-with-250m-punitive-damage-award/

 http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-novartis-20100520,0,7106473.story

 http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2010/05/18/Novartis-to-appeal-sex-discrimination-case/UPI-21041274212411/

 http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/industries/health-care/jury-finds-novartis-guilty-gender-discrimination/

 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/05/16/bloomberg1376-L2KOVC07SXKX-4.DTL

 http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=10668532

 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/05/16/bloomberg1376-L2KUJ90D9L35-4.DTL

 http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202458331182&Jury_Finds_Sex_Bias_by_Novartis_Supports_Punitive_Damages

TN – Celestica Inc., agreed to pay $102,100 to settle a disability discrimination suit brought by the EEOC on behalf of a former employee who alleged she was refused an accommodation in the form of an electric wheelchair for her disability

TX – A Sonic Drive-In has agreed to a $31,000 settlement in a sexual harassment suit brought on behalf of a female employee who alleged she was subject to unwanted sexual conduct by her manager.

NC – A custom homes manufacturer will pay $118,000 to settle a race harassment suit brought on behalf of a group of African American employees who alleged they were subject to harassment at work because of their race.

MI – Pinnacle Airlines agreed to a $20,000 settlement in a disability discrimination suit brought on behalf of a former employee with arthritis in her knee who alleged she was fired for walking too slowly.

NY -  A fire company will pay between $180,000 and $240,000 in the form of pension benefits in an age discrimination suit brought on behalf of a group of firefighters who alleged that they were not allowed to accrue credit toward a “length of service award” after age 65.

MN – A federal judge ruled in favor of the EEOC in an age discrimination suit against the Minnesota Department of Corrections for their use of a retirement plan that provided reduced benefits for individuals over age 55.  The court held that the department’s plan was “facially discriminatory.”

AZ – An electrical contractor has agreed to pay $100,000 to settle a national origin discrimination and retaliation suit brought on behalf of a former employee who alleged he was discriminated against because of his national origin and then fired after he complained about it.

OR – Wheeler County will pay $25,000 to settle an age discrimination suit brought by the EEOC on behalf of a resident who alleged she was not selected for a job with the county because of her age, and that the county then hired a younger, less qualified person for the job.

GA – A Sonic Drive-In will pay $70,000 to settle a sex discrimination suit brought on behalf of a female employee who alleged she was subject to sexual harassment by her manager.

KY – KFC agreed to pay over $1 million to settle a sexual harassment suit brought on behalf of a group of 19 female employees who alleged they were subject to unwelcome sexual conduct by their male coworkers.

NC – An insurance company will pay $30,000 to settle a retaliation suit brought on behalf of an employee who alleged he was demoted in retaliation for reporting a sexual harassment complaint that he received from one of his subordinates.

LA – The University of Louisiana has agreed to pay $450,000 to settle an age discrimination and retaliation suit brought on behalf of a former professor and dean who alleged he was fired because of his age and then denied reemployment in retaliation for filing an age discrimination suit against the university.

MS – A car dealer will pay $85,000 to settle a sexual harassment suit brought on behalf of a group of female employees who alleged they were subject to sexual harassment on the job.  The dealership will also pay $35,000 to settle a race harassment suit brought on behalf of an African American employee who alleged he was subject to racial slurs and derogatory language because of his race.

TX – A construction company agreed to a $122,500 settlement in a religious, race, and national origin discrimination suit brought on behalf of a group of employees who alleged they were subject to harassment because of their race and religious background.

PA – Lafayette College will pay $1 million to settle a sexual harassment suit brought on behalf of five female employees who alleged they were subject to repeated sexual harassment by the college’s Loss Prevention Supervisor.

NY – The Selden Fire District has agreed to pay $263,360 to settle an age discrimination suit brought on behalf of a class of firefighters who alleged that they were not allowed to accrue credit toward a “length of service award” after age 55.

MD – A local union will pay $80,000 to settle a retaliation suit brought on behalf of a former employee who alleged she was subject to retaliation for participating in an EEOC investigation and for opposing discriminatory practices.  The suit also involved another employee who alleged she was denied a promotion after filing a discrimination charge against the union.

MS – A federal jury awarded $40,000 in back pay and $165,000 for pain and suffering to a former teacher who alleged she was fired as a result of racial discrimination.

NY – A federal jury found in favor of a local television station in a sexual harassment suit brought by a former reporter who alleged she was harassed and then fired in retaliation after she complained. 

NY – A federal jury found in favor of Cornell University in an age and sex discrimination suit brought by a former employee who alleged she was discriminated against when her contract was not renewed by the university.

NJ – An appellate court affirmed the trial court’s verdict in favor of the employer in a disability discrimination case.  The court rejected the plaintiff’s “cat’s paw theory” argument and found that the jury had properly found that the plaintiff had failed to prove pretext on the part of the employer.

OH – A federal jury found in favor of the city employer in a race discrimination and retaliation suit brought by a former employee who alleged he was discharged for opposing discriminatory practices in the workplace.

MI – A jury found in favor of the city of Detroit in a whistleblower suit brought by a police officer who alleged he was harassed and retaliated against while he was serving as former Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick’s bodyguard.

KY – A former Cracker Barrel employee brought suit against the restaurant chain alleging sexual harassment and hostile work environment claims after she was ordered by her manager to remove her shirt and iron it in an area open to other employees, but did not subject male employees to the same treatment.

MO – A former St. Louis Cardinals’ intern brought suit against the organization under the Missouri Human Rights Act alleging race and gender discrimination after she was assigned different job duties than other employees and eventually discharged.

IN – Wal-Mart will pay $11.7 million to settle a sex discrimination suit brought by the EEOC on behalf of a group of female employees who alleged they were denied warehouse jobs because of their sex.  The settlement also requires the company to provide jobs to eligible female class members.

IL – A beverage distribution company will pay $50,000 to settle a disability discrimination suit brought on behalf of a former employee who claimed she was terminated after requesting medical leave.  According to the EEOC, the company had a policy that allowed employees to take leave only during certain months of the year.

PA – A McDonald’s franchisee has agreed to settle a disability discrimination suit for $90,000 brought on behalf of a former employee who alleged he was harassed due to his disability.

WY – A wholesale supplier will pay $33,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation suit brought on behalf of a female employee who alleged she was harassed by a male co-worker and then by the manager to whom she complained about the harassment.

MO – A St. Louis construction company agreed to pay $17,000 to settle a disability discrimination suit brought by the EEOC on behalf of a former worker who alleged he was regarded as disabled by the company due to a history of liver and kidney problems.

HI – A car dealership has agreed to pay $32,500 to settle a disability discrimination suit brought on behalf of a job applicant who alleged his offer was revoked after a drug test revealed his use of prescription medications. 

WA – A tire services company will pay $2 million to settle a sex discrimination case brought on behalf of a class of female workers who alleged they were denied service jobs despite being qualified.

TN – A concrete company has agreed to pay $135,000 to settle a national origin and age discrimination and retaliation suit brought against one of its subsidiaries on behalf of an employee who alleged he was harassed and demoted because of his age and national origin, and then retaliated against for complaining.

AZ – A bottling and distribution company will pay $33,000 to settle a disability discrimination suit brought on behalf of a former employee who alleged he was fired because he had diabetes.

MN – A dry cleaning company has agreed to settle a pregnancy discrimination suit for $42,250 brought on behalf of a former employee who was transferred and then fired after she became pregnant.  According to the EEOC, the company had a policy of transferring pregnant employees from plant to store positions.

MD – A staffing services company will pay $115,000 to settle a religious discrimination suit brought on behalf of two Jewish employees who alleged they were subject to harassment by their managers and co-workers.

WI – An egg processing company has agreed to pay $50,000 to settle a disability discrimination suit brought by the EEOC on behalf of a former employee who alleged she was fired because she had epilepsy.

MO – A charter school company agreed to a $570,000 settlement in a pregnancy discrimination suit brought on behalf of two former employees who alleged they were not rehired by the company because they were pregnant.

WI – A staffing services company will pay $75,000 to settle a disability discrimination suit brought on behalf of an applicant who alleged he was not referred for a job because he was deaf.

WI – A Milwaukee manufacturing company has agreed to pay $35,000 to settle a sexual harassment and discrimination suit brought on behalf of a female employee who alleged she was harassed because of her sex.

AZ – A Sedona tour company will pay $35,000 to settle an age discrimination suit brought on behalf of a former employee who alleged she was fired after just two days on the job because of her age.

HI – Kmart has agreed to pay $120,000 to settle an age discrimination and retaliation suit brought on behalf of a former employee who alleged she was harassed and retaliated against because of her age until she was eventually forced to quit.

TX – A rental company will pay $21,500 to settle a religious discrimination suit brought on behalf of a former employee who alleged he was fired after he refused to participate in a company practice intended to show support for the military.  The employee informed the company that his religious beliefs as a Jehovah’s Witness did not permit him to participate in the practice and requested an accommodation, but the company ignored his request and then fired him.

GA – A Baptist Church school has agreed to pay $53,000 to settle two pregnancy discrimination suits brought on behalf of a former employee who was fired because she was pregnant, and a job applicant whose offer was rescinded after the school learned of her pregnancy.

IL – A baking company will pay $350,000 to settle a national origin discrimination and retaliation suit brought on behalf of a group of employees who alleged they were harassed because of their national origin and then retaliated against for complaining about the harassment.

In Bess v. Hecker, 08-2184, a federal court jury in Trenton, N.J., found that Laurence Hecker of Toms River, N.J., and APM Financial Services, the debt-collection servicing company he represented in collection issues, were dual employers and therefore jointly liable for discriminating against a black employee, Steven Bess.

In proving that Hecker maintained the requisite control over plaintiff to establish that he was an employer, the fact that the company presented itself to the public as “The Law Office of Laurence Hecker” was heavily relied upon.  “The Law Office of Laurence Hecker” was on the outside of the building; Hecker had an office inside APM; and APM paid all rent and utilities associated with the maintenance of Hecker’s law office.  In addition, employees considered the attorney to be an employer.  Plaintiff’s evidence suggested that all the debt-collection work at APM was actually performed on Hecker’s behalf and that the employees considered themselves working for him as an employer.

Hecker argued that he didn’t even belong in the case.  There was no evidence Hecker had a role in any workplace bias, and he gave un-rebutted testimony that he never even had a conversation with Bess.  The alleged bias was perpetrated by an APM supervisor.  His only supervisory role was to ensure that agents comply with the Federal Debt Collection Practices Act and he had no authority to hire workers and was “not sure” if he had authority to fire employees because he had never done so.

But it was clear that the work space and phone number were the same for both Hecker and APM, although Hecker claimed that he had an office at APM only because he figured that if he had to travel to the company it should provide him with space to work.  Further, Hecker and the company had the same telephone number.  When the joint employer questions was brought to the jury, it was determined that Hecker was a dual-employer.  The jury found Hecker and the company liable for $95,000 in compensatory damages and added $600,000 in punitives in the March 15 verdict. 

This case shows that a jury can and will judge a book by its cover.  While the company took full responsibility for employee relations, Hecker could not overcome the fact that APM presented itself to the public to under his name and was intertwined with the agency’s operations on a day-to-day basis.  It is tough to convince anyone, whether judge or layman, that an entity has no control over the employment relations of an individual when your name is on the door and you are in the office on a day-to-day basis to oversee operations.  Even if an entity is not responsible for employee relations on paper, when there is absolutely no separation between the operations of both entities in other aspects of business operations it is tough to argue that there is separation in the employment context only.

Law.com has the story here.

Contributed by Michael Wilson Stoker

NY – A federal jury awarded $1.25 million to a high school student who alleged he was subject to racial harassment by fellow students.

MI – In another suit against a school district, a jury awarded $800,000 to a student who alleged he was bullied by classmates and sexually harassed.

PA – A federal appeals court affirmed the trial court’s verdict in favor of Penn State University in a gender and race discrimination suit brought by a university professor who alleged she was treated differently than her colleagues with respect to her raises and promotions.

CA – A federal judge affirmed a jury’s $2.5 million verdict in favor of a female firefighter who alleged she was subject to discrimination by the city because of her gender.

OH – A federal jury awarded $1.83 million to a former city employee who alleged she was discriminated against because of her race and disability and then retaliated against for complaining about the discrimination.

MO – A federal appeals court increased the district court’s award of punitive damages from $20,500 to $54,750 in a sexual harassment case brought by a low-income housing tenant against her landlord.  The court also awarded the tenant $78,000 in attorneys’ fees.

NY – A federal jury found in favor of a female police officer who alleged she was subject to sexual discrimination and retaliation by the city.  The judge reduced the jury’s award from $650,000 to $400,000.