According to a lawsuit filed in late September by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Reed Pierece’s, a sports bar and grill in Byram Mississipi has been a really bad boss, allegedly firing a waitress based soley on the fact that she was pregnant.

Melody McKinley contends that she was fired after asking to change her shift to go to a doctor’s appointment and experiencing pregnancy-related complications. The suit alleges that Reed Pierce’s told McKinley that although she was a good employee, “the baby was taking its toll on her.” She was then let go from her waitressing job. McKinley asked to keep working as a call-in employee or hostess, but the bar refused. The EEOC clearly outlines its policy on pregnancy discrimination:

Pregnancy discrimination violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. The EEOC filed suit in U.S. District Court in the Southern District of Mississippi (Civil Action No. 3:10-cv-00541-WHB -LRA) after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement. The suit seeks monetary relief for the victim, a court order requiring the company to implement new policies and practices designed to prevent pregnancy discrimination, provide employee training on anti-discrimination laws, posting of notices at the work site and other injunctive relief.

“The law protects employees’ rights to continue working during their pregnancy,” said Delner Franklin-Thomas, district director for the EEOC’s Birmingham District Office.

C. Emanuel Smith, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Birmingham District Office, said, “It is important for employers to recognize that women have the right to remain gainfully employed throughout their pregnancy. This lawsuit is a step in that direction.”

In Fiscal Year 2009, the EEOC received 6,196 charges alleging pregnancy discrimination.

For more information on the EEOC and its policies, click here.

Solid waste company Republic Services was found to have discriminated against 21 employees who were over the age of 40. Now the Phoenix based company must pay close to $3 million to settle the age discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). From the EEOC’s website:

According to the EEOC, Phoenix-based Republic terminated and denied job transfer opportunities to about 21 employees over the age of 40 at its facilities in southern Nevada between 2003 and 2005 because of their age. The list of terminated employees includes garbage collectors, drivers, and supervisors, some of whom were employed by the company for more than 25 years. The EEOC contends that those jobs were then offered to younger employees who were subsequently held to lower performance standards. The EEOC further charged that Republic engaged in a form of hazing called “break him off,” in which some employees were worked to the point of exhaustion, often making it difficult for them to do their jobs.

“No one should be harassed at work or forced out of a job for discriminatory reasons,” said EEOC Chair Jacqueline A. Berrien. “The law clearly prohibits mistreatment or dismissal of older workers on account of their age, and no workplace should lose productive and valuable employees because of illegal age stereotyping.”

“Our hope is that other employers implement practices to ensure that age stereotyping does not occur in any facet of employment,” said P. David Lopez, General Counsel of the EEOC. “As illustrated by this settlement, the EEOC will insist on substantial and meaningful relief for victims of illegal age discrimination.”

According to the agreement, Republic Services must also provide annual anti-discrimination training to its employees, designate a corporate equal employment opportunity compliance officer and conduct an audit of its employment policies.

Read the whole story here.

The Ritz-Carlton would rather appease a racist guest than back their 15 year employee – and now they’re being sued because of it.

Haitian America waiter Wadner Tranchant who works at the Ritz-Carlton resort in Naples Florida is suing the hotel and its vice president for discrimination after he was told that guest, Rodney Morgan, had requested that he not be served by “people of color or with a foreign accent.”

Instead of putting racist Rodney out on his ass where he belonged, managing director Edward Staros entered the request in the hotel’s computer system. Initially Tranchant begun serving racist Rodney but was later prevented by his supervisors from continuing.

Guess what Ritz-Carlton? The customer isn’t always right, and we can only hope that racist Rodney’s hotel stay will cover the cost of Mr. Tranchant’s lawsuit. Way to have your employee’s back Ritz.

Source: ebosswatch