Racial harassment case settled for $180,000
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) finally resolved its race and national origin harassment suit this June against the privately owned NFI Interactive Logistics LLC, headquartered in New Jersey. The company is a provider of transportation and distribution services. The case was related to the conduct at the company’s now-closed Bolingbrook facility, and had remained pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois before Honorable Magistrate Judge Michael Mason.[1]
The matter was handled by trial attorneys Deborah Hamilton and Richard Mrizek of EEOC’s Chicago District Office under the supervision of Supervisory Trial Attorney Gregory Gochanour. The Chicago District Office with area offices in Milwaukee and Minneapolis is responsible for processing discrimination charges, administrative enforcement as well as the conduct of agency litigation in Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and North and South Dakota.
As a result, the company has agreed to take proactive measures to help ensure that its employees work in an environment free from harassment, that would include providing anti-harassment training for certain human resource professionals and managers, and tracking and reporting future complaints of harassment. In addition to this, the company has also agreed to pay $180,000 as a matter of compensation to five of its employees that according to the agency were victimized during their employment with the company.
The EEOC Regional Attorney John C. Hendrickson is of the view that:
“This employer is doing just what we hope – and expect – that all employers will do: taking proactive steps to ensure that all employees work in an environment where no employee is subject to harassment based on race or national origin”…..”Experience demonstrates that these kinds of employer actions make a real difference, and we are pleased that NFI has embraced its responsibilities.”
Julianne Bowman, the EEOC district director in Chicago, advised that no employer should be without a robust anti-harassment policy and training, further ensuring that their employees have a clear understanding of the same.
[1] See Case No. 1:14-cv-07569; see also Case details at: http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/2f4w3adba/illinois-northern-district-court/eeoc-v-nfi-interactive-logistics-llc/
Related Content
Indo-US Legal Sector Redefined: Consulate General of India, New York, SEPC India, and Draft n Craft Join Forces.
NEW YORK, UNITED STATES, June 29, 2023-The Indo-US Legal Sector – Redefining Relationships Conference, a groundbreaking event aimed at fostering...
Indo-US Legal Sector – Redefining Relationships Conference to Unite Legal Professionals from India and the United States
Indo-US Legal Sector – Redefining Relationships Conference to Unite Legal Professionals from India and the United States This...
Importance of Medical Records Summaries in Mass Tort Litigation
Mass torts cases are complex and often involve multiple plaintiffs who have suffered harm from the same product...
Care Plus and its Entities Agree to Pay $7.2 Million Against Anti-Kickback Allegations
On April 13, 2022, Care Plus Management, LLC (“Care Plus”), its founders Paul D. Weir and John R....
Copper Creek (Marysville) | Washington Court of Appeals on Effect of Bankruptcy Discharge on Statute of Limitations
On April 11, 2022, the Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1 granted the motion for reconsideration and...
Federal District Court, California Dismisses Class Action Suit for Lack of Specific Jurisdiction
On April 01, 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California ruled in dismissal of...
Southern District of Florida Grants Motion to Dismiss in Mass Class Action
On April 5, 2022, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida has granted motion...
First Department Ordered New Trial in Personal Injury Damages Lawsuit
On March 29, 2022, the Appellate Division, First Department, decided in Miller v. Camelot Communications Group, Inc., 2022...
Supreme Court of Georgia Rules out Product Liability due to Third Party’s Wrongful Behavior
The Supreme Court of Georgia on March 15, 2022, decided in Maynard v. Snapchat, Inc., Case that a...
Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA): Employers fate to be decided in 2022
On December 15, 2021, the United States Supreme Court announced to review the most consequential PAGA case Viking...
New Jersey Lawmakers Advance Bill To Allow Pandemic Insurance
A New Jersey Assembly committee on Wednesday advanced legislation that would permit insurers to offer coverage to policyholders...
Tech groups criticize Florida’s social media law as Unconstitutional.
Tech groups criticize Florida's social media law as unconstitutional.
New York ‘HERO’ Act requires employers to establish airborne infectious disease safety protocols.
The New York HERO Act (S.1034-B/A.2681-B), a critical bill requiring businesses to have enforceable safety standards to prevent...
Cost-padding, profit shedding law firms! Are you one of them?
Cost padding happens when a business deliberately inflates its costs than what it has incurred and then passes...
Draft n Craft launches Aptcaptive™: Level 2.0 of Legal Process Outsourcing
So much is talked about Legal Process Outsourcing (LPO) that we barely find any law-firm and corporation incognizant...
Economic loss doctrine not to restrict negligence claim against geotechnical engineer: Texas Court of Appeals
Recently, the Texas Court of Appeals came up with a holding that in the absence of contractual privity...
ENFORCEABILITY OF EXCULPATORY CLAUSES
Courts have had varied opinions on the enforceability of exculpatory clauses in contracts. Exculpatory clauses or the “release...
How Legal Outsourcing Firms in the USA Are Transforming Law Practice?
The Pain They’re Quietly Solving and Why It Matters Now More Than Ever Why Are Attorneys Leaving? A...
