Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Sherree Salter, et al., v. The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., Andre Jones

Similar documents
EEOC v. Northwest Savings Bank

EEOC v. Pacific Airport Services, Inc.,

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Maharaja Hospitality Inc, d/b/a Quality Inn by Choice Hotels

EEOC v. Consolidated Stores, Inc. d/b/a Big Lots

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Rochdale Village, Inc.

EEOC and Maria Torres v. The Restaurant Company dba Perkins

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Studley Products, Inc. and Wildwood Industries, Inc., Defendants.

EEOC v. Hiten Hospitality L.L.C. d/b/a Family Motor Inn and Jay Kishan Hospitality, Inc. and Mike Patel

EEOC v. Applegate Holdings LLC

EEOC v. Altec Industries

EEOC v. Tropiano Transportation Services, Inc.

EEOC v. Family Dollar Stores of Arkansas

EEOC v. Jolet II, Inc., d/b/a Thompson Care Center

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Bob Watson Chevrolet

EEOC v. RSG Forest Products Inc. dba Estacada Lumber Co.

EEOC v. Hannon's Food Services of Jackson Inc (d/b/a Kentucky Fried Chicken)

EEOC v. U-Haul International Inc.

EEOC v. Mcdonald's Restaurants of California, Inc.

EEOC v. Grimmway Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a Grimmway Farms; Esparza Enterprises, Inc.

EEOC v. NEA-Alaska, Inc.

EEOC, et al v Lafayette College, et al.,

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Revolution Studios and Smile Productions, LLC

U.S. EEOC v Promens USA, Inc. and Bonar Plastics, Inc.

EEOC v. Mason County Forest Products, LLC

EEOC v. River View Coal, LLC

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Mint Julep Restaurant Operations, LLC d/b/a Cheddar's Casual Cafe, Defendant.

EEOC v. Oglethorpe University

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission et al. v. Majesty Maintenance, Inc.

EEOC v. Ealge Wings Industries, Inc.

EEOC & Aimee Boss and Morgan Hagedon v. Bodega Bars USA, LLC d/b/a Mosaic Restaurant

EEOC v. Bice of Chicago, et al.

United States of America v. The City of Belen, New Mexico

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Japanese Food Solutions Inc., d/b/a Minado Restaurant

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Betsy Ross Flag Girl, Inc. d/b/a Betsy Ross Flag Girl and Barjac Company

EEOC v. JEC Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a McDonalds

EEOC, Christopher, Bhend, and Chamara v. National Education Association, National Education Association - Alaska

EEOC. v. Fox News. Cornell University ILR School. Judge William H. Pauly

EEOC v. Merrill Pine Ridge, LLC

EEOC and David Marcotte and Robert Kerouac v. Federal Express Corp.

EEOC v. CMC Service of Chicago, LLC d/b/a Great Clips for Hair

EEOC v. Supervalu Holdings, Inc.

EEOC v. Cleveland Construction, Inc.

EEOC v. Pass and Seymour, Inc. and Kennmark Group, Ltd. (Consent Decree as to Pass and Seymour)

EEOC v. John Wieland Homes and Neighborhoods, Inc.

EEOC v. Fleming, Inc., d/b/a J. Edward's

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, and The Heil Company, Defendant.

EEOC & Suzanne Whitty v. Mount Carmel, LLC, and Benedictine Health System, et al.

EEOC v. Dillard's, Inc

EEOC v. Alyeska Pipeline Service Co.

EEOC and Darmo et al. v. Pinnacle Nissan, Inc. et al.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff and Jane Doe, Plaintiff-Intervenor v. Brookshire Grocery Company, Defendant.

EEOC v. Moka Shoe Corporation

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Convergys Corporation

EEOC v. Original Hot Dog Shops, Inc. doing business as Original Hot Dog Shop, Food Gallery Original, Inc. doing business as Original Hot Dog Shop

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. The Gehl Corporation d/b/a The Gehl Group

United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Jetson Midwest Mailers, Inc., Defendant.

EEOC v. Brink's Incorporated

EEOC v. Supreme Corporation and Supreme Northwest LLC

EEOC v. Baldwin Supply Co.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. American Seafoods Company

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Dutch Farms, Inc.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. American Airlines, Inc., and Transport Workers Union Local 501

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, et al., v. White House Home for Adults

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Associated Home Health Care of Palm Beach.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, CV-W-2-ECF

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission et al. v. Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc., d/b/a Harbor Freight Tools

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Foodscience Corporation

EEOC v. Wal-Mart Stores d/b/a Sam s Club

)

EEOC v. KCD Construction, Inc.

EEOC v. Stephens Institute d/b/a The Academy of Art College

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. The Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc., Defendant.

EEOC & Rodriguez, et al. v. Dynamic Medical Services, Inc.

Cornell University ILR School. Judge Karen E. Schreier

Griffin & EEOC v. Formosa Plastics

EEOC v. Parker Palm Springs Hotel

EEOC v. PVNF, L.L.C., d/b/a Chuck Daggett Motors and Big Valley Auto

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and Peter Servidio, Plaintiffs, v. Labranche & Co., Inc., Defendant.

EEOC v. BJ's Wholesale Club, Inc.

EEOC & Wolansky v. United Healthcare of Florida, Inc.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLIll~ STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DIVISION CONSENT DECREE THE LITIGATION

Anita Robinson, et al., v. Boeing Company, d/b/a Boeing Defense & Space Group

EEOC v. Lawry's Retaurants, Inc,, d/b/a Lawry's The Prime Rib, Five Crowns, and Tam O'Shanter Inn

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. United Airlines, Inc., Defendant.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Monk's Inc., d/b/a International House of Pancakes, Defendant.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Tri-Spur Investment Company, Inc., dba Sbarro's Italian Eatery

Case 2:01-cv DLG Document 30 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2002 Page 1 of 10

EEOC & Mitchel, et al., v. Allied Aviation Services, Inc., Allied Aviation Fueling of Dallas, LP, Allied Aviation Fueling Company of Texas, Inc.

Case 1:11-cv NLH -AMD Document 61 Filed 01/24/13 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 211 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

EEOC v. Eastern Engineered Wood Products, Inc.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Lutheran Social Services of Southern California, Defendant.

EEOC v. Michoacan Seafood Group. LLC

United States of America v. City of Alma, Georgia and Bacon County, Georgia

EEOC v. Ruby Tuesday, Inc.

Case 5:07-cv VAP-JCR Document 11 Filed 06/14/2008 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. lj'lhed States FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS E,.'/';~rn DiStrict. HOUSTON DIVISION CONSENT DECREE

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. Plaintiff, Defendant. CONSENT DECREE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA. Plaintiff Sharolynn L. Griffiths, by and through her undersigned counsel, by way of JURISDICTION

Transcription:

Cornell University ILR School DigitalCommons@ILR Consent Decrees Labor and Employment Law Program 7-20-2005 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Sherree Salter, et al., v. The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., Andre Jones Judge William H. Steele Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/condec Thank you for downloading this resource, provided by the ILR School's Labor and Employment Law Program. Please help support our student research fellowship program with a gift to the Legal Repositories! This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Labor and Employment Law Program at DigitalCommons@ILR. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consent Decrees by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@ILR. For more information, please contact hlmdigital@cornell.edu.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Sherree Salter, et al., v. The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., Andre Jones Keywords EEOC, Sherree Salter, The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount Inc., Andre Jones, 1:03-CV-00863-WS-B, 1:04-CV-00494-WS-B, Consent Decree, Disparate Treatment, Sexual Harassment, Sex, Female, Assignment, Retaliation, Retail, Title VII, Employment Law This article is available at DigitalCommons@ILR: http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/condec/565

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION SHERREE SALTER, ET A L, EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiffs, vs. THE SHOE SHOW OF ROCKY MOUNT, INC., ANDRE JONES, Defendants. Civil Action Number: 1:03-CV-00863-WS-B c/w 1:04-CV-00494-WS-B. CONSENT DECREE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS U.S. DISTRICT COURT SOU. D1ST ALA. FILED IN CLERK'S OFFICE JUL 2 0 2005 CHARLES R. DIARD, JR. CLERK Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq. (Title VII guarantees protected workers that they will be free from employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. In this case the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC has filed suit in Civil Action 1:04-CV-00494-WS-B seeking relief for Angela M. Lett, Brittany Salter, TaHarra Lett and a class of women (including, without limitation, Casey Thames, Dawn Brooks and Rasla McCreary. Angela M. Lett, Brittany Salter and TaHarra Lett had previously filed charges of discrimination alleging that The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., through the actions of one its supervisors, Store Manager Andre Jones, discriminated against them in violation of Title VII by subjecting them to unwelcome and offensive sexual actions, comments and unwelcome and inappropriate touching of their private body

parts. In addition it was alleged that The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., Defendant Employer, through the actions of one its supervisors, Store Manager Andre Jones, reduced the work hours and thus the earnings of Brittany Salter in retaliation for her opposition to an employment practice which she believed to violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In addition it was alleged that The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., since at least March 26, 2003, has willfully failed, in violation of Section 711(a and (b of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-10(a and (b, to post and keep posted notices which have been prepared or approved by the Commission setting forth excerpts from or summaries of the pertinent provisions of Title VII and information pertinent to the filing of a charge or complaint. The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., expressly denies all claims and allegations asserted in the Complaint. The EEOC s lawsuit has been consolidated with Civil Action 1:03-CV-00863-WS-B which is a lawsuit filed against The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., by certain individuals complaining of the same or similar conduct as that alleged in the EEOC s lawsuit. The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., expressly denies all claims and allegations asserted in the Complaint in that lawsuit. The EEOC and The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., being aware of the risks, uncertainties and costs of continued litigation, are now desirous of resolving, through this Consent Decree, the claims asserted in the above styled lawsuit Civil Action 1:04- CV-00494-WS-B. This Court being fully advised of the premises of this case doth hereby Order, Adjudge and Decree as follows: 2

II. SPECIFIC PROVISIONS A. This Court has full jurisdiction to decide this controversy as to the EEOC and The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc. This Court expressly retains jurisdiction for the next 12 months for the purpose of ensuring compliance with this Decree and entry of such further orders as may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Decree. This Decree will remain in effect for twelve months and will expire without further action by the parties or the Court twelve months after entry. It is expressly agreed by the parties that the Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce this Consent Decree. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America. 511 U. S. 375 (1994. B. Nothing herein shall be deemed to be an admission by The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., that it has at any time, place or in any manner whatsoever, violated either Title VII or any other statute, rule of law or legally binding regulation concerning Angela M. Lett, Brittany Salter, TaHarra Lett, Casey Thames, Dawn Brooks and Rasla McCreary or any other person who has been employed by The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc. C. This Decree, being entered with the consent of the EEOC and The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., shall not constitute an adjudication or finding on the merits of the case, nor shall it be used as evidence of a violation of Title VII or other law in any subsequent action by EEOC against The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., except no party shall be prohibited by this provision from proceeding against any other for noncompliance with any provision of this Decree. D. This Decree shall fully and finally resolve, with prejudice, all claims raised in the Complaint in Civil Action 1:04-CV-00494-WS-B including without limitation the 3

matters alleged in the Charges of Discrimination numbered 130-2003-00964,130-2003 01075, 130-2003-03145 and 130-2004-01107 filed by Angela M. Lett, Brittany Salter, TaHarra Lett and Casey Thames with the EEOC. E. The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., has agreed to pay an agreed upon monetary amount in settlement of the individual claims which are the subject of the lawsuit in Civil Action 1:04-CV-00494-WS-B and the lawsuit with which this lawsuit has been consolidated, Civil Action 1:03-CV-00863-WS-B, inclusive of all attorney s fees and costs. Those payments will be made in connection with a separate settlement agreement to be executed by the individual claimants and the lawsuit Civil Action 1:03- CV-00863-WS-B will be resolved in a separate proceeding. The monetary amount is being paid as a result of proceedings and actions taken in Civil Action 1:03-CV-00863- WS-B and Civil Action 1:04-CV-00494-WS-B. F. The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., agrees that it will not retaliate against any of its former or present employees because such persons have filed Charges of Discrimination, testified, assisted, benefited, or participated in any manner in the investigations, proceedings or hearings in this lawsuit. G. The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., agrees to comply with all requirements of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and immediately post the notice, attached as Exhibit A, where it will be visible to all employees at its Monroeville, Alabama store. This notice shall remain posted during the term of this Consent Decree. 4

H. Within sixty (60 days of the entry of this Decree, The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., will provide training for the employees at its Monroeville, Alabama, store as follows: The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., shall provide at least two hours of classroom or other effective interactive training and education regarding harassment, including sexual harassment to all supervisory employees who are employed as of the date of entry of this Consent Decree and to all new supervisory employees within six months of their assumption of a supervisory position. The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount Inc., shall provide at least two hours of classroom or other effective interactive training and education regarding harassment, including sexual harassment to all non-supervisory employees who are employed as of the date of entry of this Consent Decree and to all new non-supervisory employees within six months of their employment. The training and education required by this Consent Decree shall include information and practical guidance regarding the federal statutory provisions concerning the prohibition against and the prevention and correction of harassment, including sexual harassment and the remedies available to victims of harassment, including sexual harassment in employment. The training and education for supervisory employees shall also include practical examples aimed at instructing supervisors in the prevention of harassment, discrimination, and retaliation, and shall be presented by trainers or educators with knowledge and expertise in the prevention of harassment, discrimination, and retaliation. 5

The training and education for non-supervisory employees shall also include practical examples aimed at instructing non-supervisors in the recognition and reporting of harassment, discrimination, and retaliation, and shall be presented by trainers or educators with knowledge and expertise in the prevention of workplace harassment, including sexual harassment, and other forms of unlawful discrimination, and retaliation. The training and education required by this Consent Decree is intended to establish a minimum threshold and should not discourage the Defendant from providing for longer, more frequent, or more elaborate training and education regarding workplace harassment or other forms of unlawful discrimination in order to meet its obligations to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent and correct workplace harassment, including sexual harassment and all other forms of unlawful discrimination. Nothing in this Consent Decree is intended to prevent training of both supervisory and nonsupervisory employees together in appropriate circumstances. The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount agrees to employ Lehr Middlebrooks Price & Vreeland, P.C. to fulfill its training obligations under this Consent Decree. I. Within ninety (90 days of the entry of this Consent Decree, The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., will provide the Birmingham District Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission with proof of the action taken to inform and train its personnel as outlined in paragraphs H above. The report will include copies of materials used in the training discussed above, which reflect the substance of the training, and will be mailed to J. Mark Graham, Senior Trial Attorney, EEOC, 1130 22nd Street, South, Suite 2000 Birmingham, AL 35205. 6

J. The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., has in place an anti-discrimination policy and complaint procedure. A copy of that policy and procedure will be posted in the same locations as the notices referred to in paragraph G above. K. The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., will, pursuant to Section 711(a of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-10(a, post and keep posted at its Monroeville, Alabama, store notices which have been prepared or approved by the Commission setting forth excerpts from or summaries of the pertinent provisions of Title VII and information pertinent to the filing of a charge or complaint. L. Each party shall bear its own attorney s fees and costs. The EEOC is not seeking attorney s fees or costs against The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., and The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc., will not seek attorney fees or costs against the EEOC. T * - ORDERED and ADJUDGED this Q O 'Gav of. 2005. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 7

EXHIBIT A NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount Inc. This Notice is being posted pursuant to a Consent Decree entered by the federal court in EEOC v. The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount Inc., settling a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC against The Shoe Show of Rocky Mount Inc. (hereinafter Shoe Show. In its suit, the EEOC alleged that Shoe Show discriminated against a number of female employees by, among other things, subjecting them to unwelcome and offensive sexual actions, comments and unwelcome and inappropriate touching of their private body parts through the actions of one its supervisors, Store Manager Andre Jones, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, ( Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2, 5(f(1 and (3; as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991, ( CRA, 42 U.S.C. 1981 A. Shoe Show denies these allegations. To resolve the case, Shoe Show and the EEOC have entered into a Consent Decree which requires, among other things, that: (1 Shoe Show will not discriminate on the basis of sex, among other bases; and (2 Shoe Show will not retaliate against any person because he or she opposed any practice made unlawful by Title VII, filed a Title VII charge of discrimination, participated in any Title VII proceeding, or asserted any rights under the Consent Decree. The EEOC enforces the federal laws against discrimination in employment on the basis of race, sex, color, religion, national origin, disability, and age. If you believe you have been discriminated against, you may contact the EEOC at (205 731-0082 or view its web page at www.eeoc.gov. The EEOC charges no fees and has employees who speak languages other than English. Date On Behalf of the Shoe Show of Rocky Mount, Inc. 136689