New York Employment Lawyer Blog

The New York Post is reporting that a former waitress at a New York area gentleman’s club filed a lawsuit claiming she was fired because she complained about sexual harassment by both male and female supervisors.

The former Penthouse Executive Club cocktail waitress alleges that a female general manager touched her on her legs and thighs in a sexual manner. The plaintiff also alleges that the manager offered to engage in sexual relations with her in front of customers for a fee.

The EEOC has filed a lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act against an upscale steakhouse in New York City. It is alleged that male management groped and made sexual comments to other male employees. After the victims of the harassment complained about the unwelcome sexual behavior, management retaliated by assigning the complainants “less desirable” work. Subsequently, the victims were terminated.

In commenting on the case, EEOC New York District Director Spencer H. Lewis Jr. stated, “EEOC is determined to stop sexual harassment whether faced by men or women.” The case has been filed in the U.S. District in the Southern District of New York. The EEOC's press release can be found at http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/12-31-09.cfm.

A former hotel clerk who claims she was fired because she was not pretty enough is bring suit against a major hotel chain. The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals is allowing the woman to sue Heartland Inns of America, who she claims fired her due to her “tomboy” appearance.

The former employee received positive reviews and two raises while employed by the hotel, but was criticized for wearing loose fitting clothes and not wearing make up. After she was fired, the hotel began videotaping potential front desk employees so officials could see how they looked before hiring them. The court stated that companies cannot make employment decisions based on sex stereotypes, and that to fire an employee for failing to wear makeup and dresses would be sexual discrimination.

The New York City Fire Department is being threatened with the imposition of hiring quotas as a remedy for the intentional race and national origin discrimination in their hiring. A Federal Judge in Brooklyn found that two written exams were not job related which had an adverse impact against numerous African-American and Hispanic candidates.

Among the remedial measures to be put in place are immediate emergency hiring of qualified minority candidates and revisions of the exams.

A major supermarket chain in the New York area is being charged with discrimination against its female employees. In the case, which is now pending in Federal Court, claims that women were placed in lower-growth positions, such as cashiers, whereas men were given roles such as stock, which had a much better possibility of further advancement with the company.

Gender discrimination manifests itself in many different ways. For instance, this case is an example of a "glass ceiling" which is a point that women cannot advance beyond in the workplace. Additionally, sexual harassment and pregnancy discrimination are types of gender discrimination, as well.

The early part of 2010 has brought some major movement in the fight against discrimination in the workplace. Recently, The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") announced a significant, $19 Million dollar settlement against a national restaurant chain in its claims of gender discrimination. The settlement is for $19 million dollars and the restaurant must comply with several mandates of equal opportunity set forth by the EEOC.

The basis of the claim was that women were denied equal opportunities to advance, were impeded by a "glass celiling," were barred from promotion to managerial positions, and were prevented from receiving favorable job assignments.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has released its 2009 report of discrimination and retaliation claims filed in 2009. Overall it appears the total number of charges filed dropped slightly, but there was an increase in retaliation claims filed. Race and gender discrimination both still remain the protected category most commonly named in the charges filed. Disability claims also increased as well this year.

The statistics are available at:

http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/statistics/enforcement/index.cfm

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("E.E.O.C.") has recently announced its settlement of a failure to hire race discrimination claim with one of the nation's largest financial firms.

The E.E.O.C. complaint stated that Barbara Alexander, who is African-American, was amply qualified for the position of financial planning manager, but was not hired, despite performing capably during thirteen in-person interviews. The position ultimately went to a white male. It is significant to note that discrimination may exist in all aspects of the employment relationship, from hiring to promotion to termination.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has filed a lawsuit alleging sexual harassment and race discrimination against a family-run fish supplier in Brooklyn Federal Court. The suit alleges that African-American employees were subjected to racial slurs and jokes, including the n-word. The complaint alleges that the owner of the company ordered an employee to "go get it, ------. Other allegations involve sexual harassment. Two company officials are accused of "regularly grabbing or pinching male employees' buttocks and pushing their penises against employees' buttocks." The EEOC attorney handling the suit, Sanu Chandry was quoted as saying, "the stunning facts of this case remind of us of an ugly time in our nation's history."

Bridgewater Interiors, a Detroit based company specializing in the production of seating and interior systems for major automakers in North America, settled a race discrimination case on October 27th, 2009. The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on behalf of Michael Christopher, an African American who worked on the assembly line of the auto parts supplier. Bridgewater subjected Christopher to racial discrimination by failing to promote him based on his race.

Under the settlement, Bridgewater has agreed to pay Christopher a financial settlement and conduct annual training of its managers and supervisors on the issue of racial discrimination. The EEOC was pleased with the steps taken by Bridgewater to resolve the situation and confident in Bridgewater’s future adherence to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, making it illegal to deny an employee a promotion based on race.

A former female executive alleges gender discrimination in a lawsuit filed October 26, 2009 in St. Louis. She claims the brewer encourages a “frat-party” and “locker room” atmosphere, which excludes women from informal social networks and pays women less than their male counterparts.

Francine Katz, A-B’s former most senior female ranking executive, alleges that she was given smaller salary and bonuses than other male executives despite repeatedly raising concerns about the disparity to A-B’s board of directors.

When Katz was promoted to the role of Vice President of Communications and Consumer Affairs, she received all the same duties formerly assigned to a male employee who held the role, but she was paid $750,000 per year less than him, according to the lawsuit.

Katz seeks lost wages, uncapped compensatory damages and punitive damages.

A former employer who gives a former employee a negative job reference in retaliation for the employee's complaint of discrimination may be liable under the human rights law.

In Jute v. Hamilton Sunstrand Corp., 420 F .3d 166, 178-79 (2d Cir. 2005), the plaintiff was on the verge of obtaining a new job. Before she was offered the job, however, her former employer told the new job that he could not give a reference because Jute "had a lawsuit pending," even though the plaintiff did not actually have a lawsuit pending. The Second Circuit, the federal appeals court in New York, held that this false statement could "negatively affect Jute's chances of securing employment" and denied the defendant's motion to dismiss the case.

Other courts since that time have also confirmed that individuals may assert a claim against former employers who, in an effort to retaliate against the employee's claim, give a negative reference. For example, in Brescia V. Sia, 2008 WL 1944010, at *4 n.3 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 30, 2008), the court rejected the defendant's effort to dismiss the plaintiff's case under similar circumstances, finding that even where the negative reference is "factually accurate," an individual may have a claim.