The EEOC continues to pursue lawsuits against employers for sexual harassment as well as other claims. In Alabama, the EEOC announced a settlement with Jack Marshall Foods, Inc., a KFC franchisee based out of Tuscaloosa. The EEOC filed it's suit in March, 2009, alleging that sexual harassment was taking place at the KFC restaurant in Monroeville. The suit claimed that that Jack Marshall tolerated male employees openly describing sexual desires and interests with female employees and engaged in unwelcome sexual conduct including touching and groping. Jack Marshall agreed to pay $1.05 million to settle the lawsuit brought on behalf of 19 female employees. It should be noted that at least 3 of the female plaintiffs were teenagers at the time the harassment occurred.
In Kansas, the EEOC filed suit on May 20 alleging that an 18 year old server at a Cactus Grill restaurant was sexually harassed by one of it's managers. The EEOC press release states that "an assistant manager at the restaurant asked the server for sex, touched her, and made unwelcome sexual advances toward her. The harassment was so intolerable that the server was forced to quit her job, amounting to an unlawful constructive discharge." The press release also quoted the director of the St. Louis District office as saying "Sexual harassment in the workplace is always wrong, but harassment of teenage workers, who are often in their first 'real' job, is even more egregious... Employers must provide safe, harassment-free workplaces for all of their employees, including teenagers".
Practice pointer. The EEOC remains active in Alabama, and around the country, in filing suits and settling claims of harassment. Both these cases involve teenagers: it should be noted that the EEOC has a specific web site dealing with teenagers in the workplace, In light of the fact that many businesses hire teenage summer help, now is the time for employers to make sure that their entire workforce, including the summer labor force, is trained on harassment and discrimination in the workplace.
GINA UPDATE. In what appears to be the first publicly released complaint filed under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, Pamela Fink filed suit against her employer in Connecticut alleging she was fired as the result of a positive test for BRAC2, the breast cancer type 2 susceptibility protein. According to Business Insurance, when she received the positive result, Ms. Fink took medical leave for a double mastectomy. The day before her second and final surgery, she received a mid year review that was "negative and scathing", was fired, and told her position had been eliminated. In a related article by Judy Greenwald with Business Insurance entitled "Discrimination claims rising in wake of genetic bias law", the following was written : “I think the EEOC, under the current administration, is being very proactive” in pursuing claims under its jurisdiction, said Daniel J. Burnick, a shareholder with law firm with Sirote & Permutt P.C. in Birmingham, Ala. In addition, more employees “are looking to the EEOC and/or the court system in an attempt to either protect their jobs or receive compensation should they lose their jobs.”
Practice pointer. I expect there to be more claims filed under GINA as more people become aware of it. As you can tell from Ms. Fink's complaint, timing is very important: the fact that she was reviewed and fired while on medical leave is suspect, to say the least.
