Archive for the ‘Discrimination’ Category
A Reader Asks This Question:
I been wondering about possible discrimination that’s happening at my job. I work in a casino and my department is made up of only war veterans and disabled war veterans. I proudly served my country for many years and I just want to know some things.
For the last couple of years every other department have gotten pay raises and just this year every other department got company benefits. I don’t understand why everybody else at this casino is getting everything and my department which is all veterans and disabled veterans is not getting anything.
They mock and laugh at us because they get everything and my department did not. Its creating a hostile workplace I come to work every night angry and leave work every morning even more angry. The disabled veterans do not have proper access to a bathroom that can properly handle there needs.
The casino has done nothing in 5 years to help the disabled veterans with there latrine needs they just ignore it. So would this be an example of discriminating against us war veterans and disabled war veterans?
Oh I forgot to add they hire kids right out of high school and they get paid more and get the benefits. While us veterans who has been here for at least 4 years do not get nothing and get paid less then some kid right out of high school. My bosses will not do anything about this situation they just ignore it completely. This is not right somebody out there please offer me some serious advice on this situation please!!
View the answer(s) below…
PRESS RELEASE
4-13-10
Cannon & Wendt to Pay $100,000 to Settle EEOC National Origin Discrimination / Retaliation Suit
PHOENIX — The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced today that it has settled a national origin discrimination and retaliation lawsuit against Cannon & Wendt Electric Co., Inc., one of the oldest and largest electrical contractors operating in Phoenix, Ariz., for $100,000 for Victor Cortez and a comprehensive consent decree, signed by Federal Judge Earl H. Carroll.
The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona in Phoenix, accusing Cannon & Wendt Electric Co., Inc. of discriminating against Victor Cortez when it subjected him to racist statements and then retaliated against him by terminating him after he complained about the unlawful discrimination.
According to the EEOC’s suit, EEOC v. Cannon & Wendt Electric, Co., Inc., CV-07-1710 PHX/EHC, employee Victor Cortez was unlawfully harassed because of his national origin by his immediate supervisor, Mark Ghose. The harassment included comments by Ghose, such as “I hate all Mexicans,” “they are worthless,” and “I hate Mexican music.” It was also alleged that Ghose openly stated his belief that Cortez was “useless” and he wanted to “get rid of him.” The EEOC also alleged that when Cortez complained to Cannon & Wendt’s then owner, Albert Wendt, Wendt failed to take any action except to ask “so, what do you want me to do about it?” The national origin harassment continued after Cortez’s complaints. Soon after he complained about the unlawful discrimination, Cannon & Wendt fired Cortez.
The EEOC obtained $100,000 for Cortez as damages for lost wages and benefits as well as compensation for the emotional distress. By entering into the consent decree, Cannon & Wendt agreed also to give Cortez an apology; subject Ghose to certain training; an injunction against national origin harassment and retaliation; reporting to the EEOC; the posting and distribution of a notice; change its anti-discrimination policies; and conduct extensive training for its supervisory and managerial workforce over the next three years.
Mary Jo O’Neill, regional attorney for the Phoenix District Office, said, “Each of the statutes that the EEOC enforces contain a specific prohibition against retaliating against any employee or applicant who opposes discrimination internally or files a charge of discrimination with a state or federal agency. Because there is a significant imbalance of power between employee and employer, this office will continue to vigorously enforce the statutes’ anti-retaliation provisions through its investigations and litigation. In Victor Cortez’s case, we are satisfied that he has been compensated for the egregious manner in which he was unlawfully treated.”
Janet Elizondo, acting director for the Phoenix District Office, said, “Title VII provides that employees, including Victor Cortez, are entitled to work and keep their dignity. No employee should ever have to sacrifice his or her identity in order to keep a job. This employer not only ignored Mr. Cortez’s rights to be free from discrimination, but also fired him because he complained about the unlawful discrimination. This is a particularly troubling case because the EEOC sued this particular employer for religious discrimination a few years ago. After being sued, most employers take their EEO obligations under the law seriously. It is troubling to the EEOC to see a repeat offender.”
EEOC Trial Attorney Veronica Molina said, “Cannon & Wendt’s treatment of Mr. Cortez was outrageous. If the company had not settled, this would have been a very good case for a punitive damages request from a jury.”
Cortez said, “I am very thankful to the EEOC for fighting for me. What happened to me was wrong. No one should have to experience what I did in order to support my family.”
The EEOC is responsible for enforcing federal laws against employment discrimination. Further information is available at www.eeoc.gov.
PRESS RELEASE
4-12-10
Bayville Fire Company Settles EEOC Age Discrimination Suit
Company Had Barred Firefighters Over 65 From Receiving Service Credits in Retirement Benefits Program, Federal Agency Charged
NEW YORK – The Bayville Fire Company on Long Island has agreed to settle a class age discrimination lawsuit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today. The fire company, as well as the Villages of Bayville, Mill Neck, and Centre Island, will pay a group of about 15-18 firefighters lost pension money and provide increased monthly pension amounts going forward to several firefighters. Depending on how many class members are finally definitively identified and the exact damages established for each one, the final total damages should be $180,000 to $240,000.
The EEOC’s suit had alleged that the fire company and villages had refused to let volunteer firefighters over age 65 accrue credit toward a “length of service award” (LOSAP), the equivalent of a retirement pension, because of their age. As a result, senior firefighters lost pension amounts after they turned 65, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), a federal law that protects workers age 40 and older from age discrimination. The EEOC filed suit, Civ. No. 07-4472, after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement.
Under the terms of the agreement, the fire company has agreed to provide the EEOC with contact information for affected firefighters, and the EEOC will survey the group to ascertain each firefighter’s lost pension. U.S. Magistrate Judge Cheryl Pollack, in Brooklyn, will oversee the process.
All three villages are located in the Town of Oyster Bay on the North Shore of Long Island, New York, and each village approved amending the pension plan.
“The system in effect penalized older firefighters because of their age, and that was simply illegal,” said EEOC Chair Jacqueline A. Berrien. “We welcome the decision to settle this case in a way that ensures that these brave firefighters, who do heroic work, do not receive different retirement benefits simply because of their age.”
Spencer H. Lewis, Jr., the EEOC’s district director in New York, added, “This case should remind all employers, including municipal employers, that federal law prohibits targeting older workers for discriminatory treatment, including in relation to pensions or retirement benefits.”
The EEOC enforces federal laws banning workplace discrimination. Further information about the agency is available at www.eeoc.gov.

