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

Similar documents
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Bob Watson Chevrolet

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

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

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

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

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Dutch Farms, Inc.

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

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

EEOC v. Ealge Wings Industries, Inc.

EEOC v. Bice of Chicago, et al.

EEOC v. Applegate Holdings LLC

EEOC v. Northwest Savings Bank

EEOC v. U-Haul International Inc.

EEOC and Maria Torres v. The Restaurant Company dba Perkins

EEOC v. Tropiano Transportation Services, Inc.

EEOC v. Pacific Airport Services, Inc.,

IN TIlE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, FOR TIlE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION. Judge Gettleman CONSENT DECREE THE LITIGATION

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

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

EEOC v. Moka Shoe Corporation

EEOC v. Dillard's, Inc

EEOC v. BJ's Wholesale Club, Inc.

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

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

EEOC v. Merrill Pine Ridge, LLC

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

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

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

EEOC v. River View Coal, LLC

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

EEOC v. Baldwin Supply Co.

Cornell University ILR School. Judge Karen E. Schreier

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

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Rochdale Village, Inc.

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

EEOC v. Altec Industries

EEOC v. Parker Palm Springs Hotel

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

EEOC v. Mason County Forest Products, LLC

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

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

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

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

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

EEOC v. NEA-Alaska, Inc.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA ) ) ) ) INTRODUCTION

EEOC v. Scrub Inc. Cornell University ILR School. Judge Susan Cox

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

EEOC v. Supervalu Holdings, Inc.

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

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

EEOC v. John Wieland Homes and Neighborhoods, Inc.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Convergys Corporation

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

EEOC v. Brink's Incorporated

EEOC v. Oglethorpe University

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ~ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) THE LmGATION

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

Griffin & EEOC v. Formosa Plastics

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

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

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

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

EEOC v. KCD Construction, 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

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

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

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

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

EEOC and Quianna M. Knowles v. Remedy Intelligent Staffing, Inc.

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION CONSENT DECREE. Tbe Litigation

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

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

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

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

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. American Seafoods Company

EEOC v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc., and CBOCS West, Inc.

EEOC v. Family Dollar Stores of Arkansas

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

Case 1:16-cv CCB Document 98 Filed 06/28/16 06/23/16 Page 1 of 14 11

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Pizza Hut of America, Inc.

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

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

EEOC v. Ruby Tuesday, Inc.

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

EEOC v. Supreme Corporation and Supreme Northwest LLC

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

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

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

United States of America v. City of Lubbock, Texas

EEOC v. Michoacan Seafood Group. LLC

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION NO Defendant. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT INTRODUCTION

EEOC v. Eastern Engineered Wood Products, Inc.

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

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

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

Case 3:06-cv JMM Document 140 Filed 06/12/09 Page 1 of 14

Transcription:

Cornell University ILR School DigitalCommons@ILR Consent Decrees Labor and Employment Law Program 7-28-2011 U.S. EEOC v Promens USA, Inc. and Bonar Plastics, Inc. Judge Edmond E. Chang 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.

U.S. EEOC v Promens USA, Inc. and Bonar Plastics, Inc. Keywords U.S. EEOC, Promens USA, Inc. and Bonar Plastics, Inc., 10 C 6232, Consent Decree, Disparate Treatment, Hostile Work Environment, Retaliation, Sexual Harassment, Assignment, Hostile Work Environment, Sexual Harassment, Terms and Conditions, Sex, Female, Other, Employment Law, Title VII This article is available at DigitalCommons@ILR: http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/condec/227

Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 38 Filed: 07/28/11 Page 1 of 14 PageID #:122 Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 35-1 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 2 of 15 PagelD #:105 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, v. Plaintiff, Case No. IOC 6232 PROMENS USA, rnc. and BONAR PLASTICS, INC. Judge Edmond E. Chang Magistrate Judge Morton DenJow Defendants. CONSENT DECREE THE LITIGATION 1, Plaintiff, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), filed this action alleging that Promens USA, Inc. and Bonar Plastics, Inc. ("Defendants") engaged in unlawful employment practices under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq. ("Title VII"), when it (a) subjected a class of female employees to a hostile work environment where they were sexually harassed; (b) retaliated against a class of female employees who rejected quid pro quo sexual advances and/or engaged in other protected activity; (c) segregated female employees into positions with lower pay and/or fewer opportunities for advancement than the positions given to male employees; and (d) subjected a class of female employees to different terms and conditions of employment because of their sex. Defendants filed an Answer denying the EEOC's allegations. 1

Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 38 Filed: 07/28/11 Page 2 of 14 PageID #:123 Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 35-1 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 3 of 15 PagelD #:106 2. In the interest of resolving this matter, and as a result of having engaged in comprehensive settlement negotiations, the parties have agreed that this action should be resolved by entry of this Consent Decree ("Decree"). 3. This Decree fully and finally resolves any and all issues and claims arising out of the EEOCs Complaint and shall be binding on the EEOC and Defendants; on Defendants' directors, officers, employees, successors, and assigns; and on all persons in active concert or participation with Defendants' directors, officers, employees, successors, and assigns. The EEOC shall seek no further relief regarding any of the claims raised in its Complaint. FINDINGS 4. Having carefully examined the terms and provisions of this Decree, and based on the pleadings, record, and stipulations of the parties, the Court finds the following: a. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action. b. This Decree conforms with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Title VII and is not in derogation of the rights or privileges of any person, c. The terms of this Decree are adequate, fair, reasonable, equitable, and just. d. This Decree adequately protects the rights of the EEOC, Defendants, the Charging Parties, class members, and the public interest. e. The Illinois Secretary of State maintains records for Defendant Bonar Plastics, Inc. under File No. 52271231. f. Defendant Promens USA, Inc. purchased Defendant Bonar Plastics, Inc. in September 2005. g. Defendant Bonar Plastics, Inc. ceased operation of the West Chicago facility when Defendant Promens USA, Inc. purchased Defendant Bonar Plastics, Inc. in September 2005. h. Defendant Bonar Plastics, Inc. did not operate the West Chicago facility at any time during this litigation. 2

Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 38 Filed: 07/28/11 Page 3 of 14 PageID #:124 Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 35-1 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 4 of 15 PagelD #:107 i. Defendant Promens USA, Inc. operated the facility located at 1005 Atlantic Drive in West Chicago, Illinois ("West Chicago facility") from September 2005 until October j. Defendant Promens USA, Inc. sold the West Chicago facility to Snyder Industries, Inc. on or about October 13, 2010. k. An entity known as Bonar Plastics, Inc. was incorporated in the State of Illinois on October 6, 2010; this entity was not a Defendant in this litigation. 1. Entry of this Decree will further the objectives of Title VII and will be in the best interests of the parties, the Charging Parties, class members, and the public. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT: MONETARY RELIEF 5. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Decree, Defendants shall make payments ("Payments") to the Charging Parties and class members in the following amounts: Charging Party Torres $60,000.00 Charging Party Marin $50,000.00 Charging Party Maldonado $45,000.00 Class Member Correa $30,000,00 Class Member Ceballos $25,000.00 Class Member Chairez $15,000.00 All monetary awards shall be allocated one hundred (100) percent to compensatory damages. Forty (40) percent of each monetary award represents compensatory damages for the EEOC's sex segregation claim in this lawsuit; the remaining sixty (60) percent of each monetary award represents compensatory damages for the other allegations in EEOC's Complaint. Promens USA, Inc. shall issue an IRS Form 1099 to each Charging Party or class member in connection with her monetary award. Each Charging Party or class member shall bear full responsibility for any tax implications to her resulting from receipt of the monetary award. 6. After this Decree is entered, no later than thirty (30) days after receipt by Promens USA, Inc. of (a) the Charging Party or class member's Taxpayer Identification Number as defined by 3

Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 38 Filed: 07/28/11 Page 4 of 14 PageID #:125 Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document*: 35-1 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 5 of 15 PagelD #:108 the Internal Revenue Service, (b) a mailing address, and (c) a Release Agreement (in the form set forth in Exhibit A) executed by the Charging Party or class member; Promens USA, Inc. shall issue and mail to the Charging Party or class member, by certified mail, a check for damages in the amounts specified in Paragraph No. 5, above. Contemporaneously, Promens USA, Inc. shall submit copies of the checks referenced above to the EEOC. If any portion of the Payments is not issued and mailed within thirty (30) days ("unpaid amount"), then, for each business day beyond the thirtieth day that such portion remains unpaid, Promens USA, Inc. shall additionally pay to the Charging Party or class member, in the manner set forth above, an amount equal to the greater of $50 or 0.1% of the unpaid amount. 7. In the event that checks are returned, Promens USA, Inc. shall contact the EEOC and attempt redelivery at an address provided by the EEOC. If Promens USA, Inc. is not able to deliver a check to a Charging Party or class member after reasonable efforts (or a Charging Party or class member refuses to execute a Release Agreement), any unallocated sums will become part of a cypres fund to be distributed to CHS District 94 Education Foundation. NON-RETALIATION 8. Promens USA, Inc. and its current or future officers, agents, employees, successors, assigns, and all persons acting in concert with them shall not engage in any form of retaliation against any person because such person has opposed any practice made unlawful under Title VII, filed a charge of discrimination under Title VII, testified or participated in any manner in any investigation, proceeding, or hearing under Title VII, or asserted any rights under this Decree. 4

Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 38 Filed: 07/28/11 Page 5 of 14 PageID #:126 Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document*: 35-1 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 6 of 15 PagelD #:109 REACQUISITION OF WEST CHICAGO FACILITY 9. In the event that Promens USA, Inc., its parent company, or one of its affiliates or subsidiaries reacquires the facility located at 1005 Atlantic Drive in West Chicago, IL 60185 at any time within three (3) years from the date of entry of this Decree, Promens USA, Inc. shall immediately contact the EEOC at the address indicated below and be bound for a period of two (2) years from the date of reacquisition to adhere to Paragraphs 10-20 below: INJUNCTION AGAINST EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION 10. Promens USA, Inc. and its officers, agents, management employees (including supervisory employees), successors, and assigns are hereby enjoined from engaging in any form of employment discrimination prohibited by Title VII, including but not limited to: (a) subjecting any employee to a hostile work environment because of his/her sex; (b) retaliating against any employee because he/she engaged in statutorily protected activity or taking any action against an employee that is intended to prevent or deter him/her from engaging in statutorily protected activity; and (c) segregating employees into different job assignments based on their sex. TRAINING 11. No later than ninety (90) calendar days after reacquisition of the West Chicago facility, all employees in Promens USA, lire's human resources department and all employees with supervisory responsibilities at the West Chicago facility shall participate in a training session conducted by an attorney from Burke, Warren, MacKay & Serritella, P.C, or a trainer approved by the EEOC pursuant to Paragraph No. 12, below. Each training session shall address employment discrimination laws, including the obligations of employers and employment agencies, with an emphasis on Title VII's prohibitions against sex discrimination and retaliation. 5

Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 38 Filed: 07/28/11 Page 6 of 14 PageID #:127 Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document*: 35-1 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 7 of 15 PagelD #:110 A registry of attendance shall be maintained for each training session. Promens USA, Inc. shall pay all costs associated with each training session. 12. In the event Promens USA, Inc. chooses not to employ Burke, Warren, MacKay & Serritella, P.C. for the required training, Promens USA, Inc. shall obtain the EEOC's approval of its proposed trainer prior to the commencement of the training session described in Paragraph No. 1 L above. EEOC shall not unreasonably withhold its approval. Promens USA, Inc. shall submit the name, address, telephone number, resume, and training proposal of each proposed trainer (including a summary of the proposed content to be presented) to the EEOC at least twenty (20) business days prior to the proposed date of the training session. EEOC shall have five (5) business days from the date of receipt of the information described above to accept or reject the alternate trainer. If the parties cannot agree on a trainer through this process, either party may seek the Court's assistance under Paragraph No. 21, below. 13. Promens USA, Inc. shall certify to the EEOC in writing no later than five (5) business days after the training session described in Paragraph No. 11, above, that the required training has taken place and that the required personnel have attended. The certification of training described in this Paragraph shall include: (i) the date, location, and duration of the training; (u) a copy of the registry of attendance, which shall include the name and position of each person trained; and (iii) copies of any and all pamphlets, brochures, outlines, or other written materials provided or displayed to the personnel attending the training session. POSTING OF NOTICE 14. Within ten (10) business days after reacquiring the West Chicago facility, Promens USA, Inc. shall post a same-sized copy of the Notice attached as Exhibit B to this Decree at the facility in a conspicuous location easily accessible to and commonly frequented by employees and 6

Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 38 Filed: 07/28/11 Page 7 of 14 PageID #:128 Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document*: 35-1 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 8 of 15 PagelD #:111 applicants for employment. This Notice shall remain posted for two (2) years from the date Promens USA, Inc. reacquires the West Chicago facility. Promens USA, Inc. shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that the posting is not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. Promens USA, Inc. shall also distribute a copy of the Notice to all persons employed at the West Chicago facility within thirty (30) days after reacquiring the facility. Promens USA, Inc. shall certify to the EEOC in writing within ten (10) business days after reacquiring the West Chicago facility that the Notice has been properly posted and distributed. Promens USA, Inc. shall permit a representative of the EEOC to enter the West Chicago facility for purposes of verifying compliance with this Paragraph at any time during normal business hours without prior notice. RECORD KEEPING 15. For a period of two (2) years following reacquisition of the West Chicago facility, Promens USA, Inc. shall maintain and make available for inspection and copying by the EEOC records (including but not limited to name, age, social security number, address, telephone number, and disposition of complaint) of each employee who complains of sexual harassment, sex discrimination, or any other violation of Title VII. 16. Promens USA, Inc. shall make all documents or records referred to in Paragraph No. 15, above, available for inspection and copying within five (5) business days after the EEOC so requests. In addition, Promens USA, Inc. shall make available all persons within its employ whom the EEOC reasonably requests for purposes of verifying compliance with this Decree and shall permit a representative of the EEOC to enter the West Chicago facility for such purposes on five (5) business days advance notice by the EEOC. 7

Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 38 Filed: 07/28/11 Page 8 of 14 PageID #:129 Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 35-1 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 9 of 15 PagelD #:112 17. Nothing contained in this Decree shall be construed to limit any obligation Promens USA, Inc. may otherwise have to maintain records under Title VII or any other law or regulation. REPORTING 18. Promens USA, Inc. shall furnish to the EEOC the following written reports semi-annually for a period of two (2) years following reacquisition of the West Chicago facility. The first report shall be due six (6) months after reacquisition. The final report shall be due twenty-three (23) months after reacquisition. Each such report shall contain: a. A description of each complaint of sex harassment, sex discrimination, or any other violation of Title VII made during the six (6) month period preceding the report; action(s) taken by Promens USA, Inc. in response to each complaint; and the disposition or resolution of each complaint. b. A certification by Promens USA, Inc. that the Notice required to be posted in Paragraph No. 14 above, remained posted during the entire six (6) month period preceding the report. DISTRIBUTION AND POSTING OF POLICY AGAINST DISCRIMINATION 19. Within thirty (30) days of reacquisition, Promens USA, Inc. shall distribute a copy of its policy against discrimination and harassment to all employees at the West Chicago facility including temporary or leased employees in English and Spanish. The policy must describe the complaint procedures available to an employee who is being discriminated against or harassed, including how to complain in the event that a supervisor is engaging in discrimination or harassment. Promens USA, Inc. must explain this policy during an orientation or training session within five (5) days of the employee's start date. Only after the training or orientation 8

Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 38 Filed: 07/28/11 Page 9 of 14 PageID #:130 Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document*: 35-1 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 10 of 15 PagelD #: 113 session referenced above may Promens USA, Inc. attempt to secure a signed policy acknowledgement form from any temporary or leased employee. 20. Within ten (10) business days after reacquiring the West Chicago facility, Promens USA, Inc. shall post a copy of its policy against discrimination and harassment in a conspicuous location easily accessible to and commonly frequented by employees and applicants for employment. The policy must be posted in English and Spanish. Promens USA, Inc. shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that the posting is not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material, DISPUTE RESOLUTION 21. In the event that either party to this Decree believes that the other party has failed to comply with any provision(s) of the Decree, the complaining party shall notify the other party of the alleged non-compliance and shall afford the alleged non-complying party ten (10) business days to remedy the non-compliance or to satisfy the complaining party that the alleged noncomplying party has complied. If the alleged non-complying party has not remedied the alleged non-compliance or satisfied the complaining party that it has complied within ten (10) business days, the complaining party may apply to the Court for appropriate relief. TERM OF THE DECREE AND RETENTION OF JURISDICTION 22. All provisions of this Decree shall be in effect (and the Court will retain jurisdiction of this matter to enforce this Decree) for a period of three (3) years immediately following entry of the Decree, provided, however, that if, before the end of the three (3) year period Promens USA, Inc. has reacquired the West Chicago facility, this Decree shall be in effect (and the Court will retain jurisdiction of this matter to enforce this Decree) for a period of two (2) years immediately 9

Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 38 Filed: 07/28/11 Page 10 of 14 PageID #:131 Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document*: 35-1 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 11 of 15 PagelD #:114 following acquisition of the West Chicago facility, and provided that if at the end of the period this Decree is to be in effect, any dispute under Paragraph No. 21, above, remains unresolved, the term of the Decree shall be automatically extended (and the Court will retain jurisdiction of this matter to enforce the Decree) until such time as al! such disputes have been resolved. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 23. Each party to this Decree shall bear its own expenses, costs, and attorneys' fees. 24. The terms of this Decree are and shall be binding upon the present and future representatives, agents, directors, officers, assigns, and successors of-promens USA, Inc. 25. When this Decree requires submissions by Promens USA, Inc. of reports, certifications, notices, or other materials to the EEOC, they shall be mailed to: Promens/Bonar Settlement; 500 West Madison St., Suite 2000; Chicago, Illinois 60661. When this Decree requires submission by the EEOC of materials to Promens USA, Inc., they shall be mailed to: Burke, Warren, MacKay & Serritella, P.C., 330 N. Wabash Avenue, 22 nd Floor, Chicago, Illinois 60611-3607, to the attention of Martin K. LaPointe. 10

Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 38 Filed: 07/28/11 Page 11 of 14 PageID #:132 Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 35-1 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 12 of 15 PagelD #:115 By the Court: SO ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED on ll us^^dayof v Agreed to in form and content: The Honorable Edmond E. Chang United States District Court For the U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSrON 500 West MMKjJfn Street, Suite 2f ChicayfC]ltfny& 6<V<?1 FnrEROMENS USA, INC. ; HAN M. M. COHE Trial Attorney GRAYSON S. WALKER Trial Attorney M

Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 38 Filed: 07/28/11 Page 12 of 14 PageID #:133 Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document*: 35-1 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 13 of 15 PagelD #:116 EXHIBIT A RELEASE AGREEMENT In consideration of to be paid to me by Promens USA, Inc. in connection with the resolution of EEQC v. Promens USA, Inc. et al. No. IOC 6232 (N.D. 111.), I, on behalf of myself, my heirs, assigns, executors, and agents do hereby fully and forever release, waive, remise, acquit, and discharge Promens USA, Inc. and any and all past and present related entities, affiliates, subsidiaries, and parent companies and all of their current and former officers, directors, shareholders, partners, employees, attorneys, successors, assigns, insurers, guarantors, indemnitors, as well as its current agents, from any and all claims and causes of action which I now have or ever had under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as a result of or arising from the subject matter and claims which were asserted in EEQC v. Promens USA, Inc. et al., No. IOC 6232 (N.D. III.). Signature: Date: 12

Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 38 Filed: 07/28/11 Page 13 of 14 PageID #:134 Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document*: 35-1 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 14 of 15 PagelD #:117 EXHIBIT B 13

Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 38 Filed: 07/28/11 Page 14 of 14 PageID #:135 Case: 1:10-cv-06232 Document #: 35-1 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 15 of 15 PagelD #:118 NOTICE TO PROMENS USA, INC. EMPLOYEES This Notice is being posted pursuant to a Consent Decree entered by a federal court in the Northern District of Illinois resolving a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") against Promens USA, Inc. and Bonar Plastics, Inc. EEOC v. Promens USA, Inc. and Bonar Plastics, Inc., No. 10 C 6232 (N.D. 111.) In its suit, the EEOC alleged that Promens USA and Bonar Plastics were liable for violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VIP), including subjecting female employees to a hostile work environment where they were (a) sexually harassment, (b) retaliated against for rejecting sexual advances and/or engaging in protected activity, and/or (c) prohibited from working as machine operators. To resolve this case, Promens USA, Inc. and the EEOC have entered into a Consent Decree which provides, among other things, that: 1. Promens USA will make monetary payments to the individuals who were affected by the alleged violations of Title VII. 2. Promens USA will not retaliate against any person because he or she makes or files a complaint of discrimination, opposes any discriminatory practice prohibited by Title VII, participates in any Title VII proceeding, or asserts any rights under this Decree; and 3. Promens USA will train all employees in its Human Resources department and all supervisory employees at the West Chicago facility regarding employment discrimination laws against sex discrimination. The EEOC is a federal agency that enforces the nation's laws prohibiting discrimination in employment based on race, color, sex (including sexual harassment and pregnancy), religion, national origin, age, disability, and retaliation. Further information about the EEOC and these laws is available on the EEOC's website at www.eeoc.gov. If you believe you have been subjected to unlawful discrimination, you may contact the EEOC by phone at 312-869-8000 or by TTY at 312-869-8001. The EEOC charges no fees. THIS IS AN OFFICIAL NOTICE AND MUST NOT BE DEFACED BY ANYONE This notice must remain posted for two years from the date below and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. Any questions about this Notice or compliance with its terms may be directed to: Promens Consent Decree Compliance; Legal Unit; U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; 500 W. Madison St., Suite 2000; Chicago, IL 60661. Date The Honorable Edmond E. Chang United States District Court 14