DOJ FILES PREGNANCY DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT AGAINST CHICAGO BOARD OF EDUCATION

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Tuesday, December 23, 2014
Justice Department Files Pregnancy Discrimination Lawsuit Against the Chicago Board of Education

The Justice Department today announced the filing of a lawsuit against the Chicago Board of Education, alleging that the board discriminated against pregnant teachers at Scammon Elementary School by subjecting them to adverse personnel actions, including termination in some instances, after they announced their pregnancies.  According to the complaint, these adverse personnel actions were in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Title VII is a federal statute that prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin and religion.  The statute explicitly prohibits employers from discriminating against female employees due to pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions.

The suit, filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, alleges that, starting in 2009, the principal at Scammon subjected female teachers to lower performance evaluations, discipline, threatened termination and/or termination because of their pregnancies.  The complaint further alleges that the board approved the firing of six recently pregnant teachers employed at Scammon and forced two other recently pregnant teachers to leave Scammon.  The department’s complaint seeks a court order that would require the board to develop and implement policies that would prevent its employees from being subjected to discrimination due to their pregnancies.  The relief sought also includes monetary damages as compensation for those teachers who were harmed by the alleged discrimination.

Two teachers who had been pregnant while working at Scammon filed charges of sex discrimination with the Chicago District Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).  The EEOC investigated the charges and determined that there was reasonable cause to believe discrimination occurred against the two charging parties as well as against other pregnant teachers.  The EEOC was unsuccessful in its attempts to conciliate the matter before referring it to the Department of Justice.

“No woman should have to make a choice between her job and having a family,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta for the Civil Rights Division.  “Federal law requires employers to maintain a workplace free of discrimination on the basis of sex.”

“Despite much progress, we continue to see the persistence of overt pregnancy discrimination, as well as the emergence of more subtle discriminatory practices in the workplace,” said EEOC Chair Jenny R. Yang.

“The EEOC will continue to vigorously enforce Title VII’s prohibition of discrimination against pregnant employees,” said John P. Rowe, former District Director of the EEOC’s Chicago District Office.  Rowe led the EEOC’s administrative investigation of the charges filed by the two teachers.

This lawsuit is brought by the Department of Justice as a result of a joint effort to enhance collaboration between the EEOC and the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division for vigorous enforcement of Title VII.

DOJ FILES SEX DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT AGAINST A TEXAS POLICE DEPARTMENT

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Justice Department Files Lawsuit Against Corpus Christi, Texas, Police Department for Sex Discrimination

WASHINGTON – The Justice Department today filed a lawsuit against the city of Corpus Christi, Texas, alleging that the city’s police department engaged in a pattern or practice of employment discrimination against women in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  The lawsuit challenges the police department’s use of a physical ability test for the hiring of entry-level police officers.  According to the complaint, the physical test used by the city between 2005 and 2011 had the effect of excluding qualified women from consideration for hire as entry-level police officers and did not screen candidates for job-related skills.

Title VII prohibits employment practices that result in a disparate impact on various bases, including sex, unless the employer can prove that such practices really test for what the job requires.  The complaint alleges that the challenged physical ability test does not meet this standard and, thus, qualified women have been unnecessarily kept out of entry-level police officer jobs.

 “This complaint demonstrates that employment practices that unnecessarily exclude qualified candidates on account of sex are unacceptable,” said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.  “The Justice Department is looking forward to working with the city to resolve this matter in a way that eliminates the use of the unlawful physical ability test and gives women who were screened out of the process an opportunity to become Corpus Christi police officers.”

In the lawsuit, the Justice Department seeks a court order that would require the city to stop using the challenged physical ability test, develop hiring procedures that comply with Title VII and provide relief that makes victims whole, including offers of hire, retroactive seniority and back pay to individual women who have been harmed as a result of the city’s use of the test

JUSTICE DEPT. SETTLES RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT AGAINST NEW YORK TRANSIT AUTHORITY

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Justice Department Settles Religious Discrimination Lawsuit Against New York City Transit Authority
The Justice Department announced today that it has reached a settlement with the New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA) to resolve allegations that the NYCTA is engaged in a pattern or practice of religious discrimination.

The Justice Department filed its complaint in September 2004 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.   The complaint alleged that the NYCTA violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by selectively enforcing its uniform headwear policies against employees who are unable to comply for religious reasons and by failing or refusing to reasonably accommodate those employees whose religious practices require an accommodation from the NYCTA’s uniform headwear policies.   Title VII prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin and religion.
According to the Justice Department’s complaint, the NYCTA had not enforced its uniform headwear policies prior to Sept. 11, 2001.   However, beginning in or about March 2002, the NYCTA began to selectively enforce those policies against Muslim and Sikh employees, moving them or threatening to move them out of public contact positions because the employees, consistent with their sincerely held religious beliefs, refused to attach NYCTA logos to their khimars and turbans, respectively.

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, which must still be approved by the court, the NYCTA must:   (1) adopt new uniform headwear policies, which would allow employees working in public contact positions to wear khimars, yarmulkes, turbans, kufis, skullcaps, tams and headscarves without attaching anything to the headwear; (2) implement and distribute a new religious accommodation policy consistent with Title VII’s requirement to reasonably accommodate the religious practices of all employees and prospective workers; and   (3) provide guidance to and ensure that training is completed by the NYCTA personnel responsible for implementing the agency’s new religious accommodation policy and procedure.  Additionally, the NYCTA will pay $184,500, divided among eight current and former NYCTA employees who were denied religious accommodations related to the NYCTA’s prior uniform headwear policies.

“This settlement agreement sends a clear message that the Department of Justice will not tolerate religious discrimination,” said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.   “I am pleased that the NYCTA has agreed to end its discriminatory practices that for years have forced employees to choose between practicing their religion and maintaining their jobs.”

JUSTICE SETTLES DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT WITH PIERCE COUNTY, WASHINGTON

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Friday, June 1, 2012
Justice Department Settles Lawsuit with Pierce County, Washington, Alleging Employment Discrimination

The Justice Department announced today it has entered into a consent decree with Pierce County, Wash., that, if approved by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, will resolve allegations that the county discriminated against a female employee by retaliating against her in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.   Title VII is a federal statute which prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin or religion and protects employees who file complaints under any of those bases.  

The department’s complaint, filed today along with the consent decree, alleges that the county, through its agents at the Pierce County Assessor-Treasurer’s Office, discriminated against Administrative Officer Sally Barnes by retaliating against her because she engaged in activity protected under Title VII.   The United States alleges in its complaint that Barnes was subjected to multiple adverse employment actions between Jan. 22, 2009 and Nov. 30, 2009, including the loss of her administrative officer and other supervisory duties, exclusion from important meetings and information necessary for the management of her division and an involuntary relocation to an undesirable work location.

“This consent decree sends the important message that discrimination and retaliation will not be tolerated,” said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division.   “I am pleased that we were able to work with the county to arrive at a resolution that will put mechanisms in place to prevent and correct discrimination and retaliation in the workplace.”

Barnes initially filed charges of discrimination and retaliation with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which investigated the matter and determined there was reasonable cause to believe discrimination occurred, referring the matter to the Justice Department.

“Retaliation by supervisors, especially elected officials, has no place in the workforce,” said U.S. Attorney Jenny A. Durkan.   “This settlement will ensure all Pierce County employees know their rights and can do their jobs without fear of being punished for contacting their human resources department about discrimination.”

Under the terms of the consent decree and settlement agreement, the county has agreed to award $400,000 to Barnes.   In addition, the county is required to review and revise its Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) policies to protect its employees from unlawful retaliation and must provide training on equal employment opportunity law and its anti-retaliation policies to all of its employees and officials at the Assessor-Treasurer’s Office.