©2025 Seyfarth Shaw LLP EEOC-INITIATED LITIGATION: 2025 EDITION | 50 49 | EEOC-INITIATED LITIGATION: 2025 EDITION ©2025 Seyfarth Shaw LLP KEY CASES FILED IN FY 2024 EEOC v. AccentCare, Inc., Case No. 3:24-cv-01646 (M.D. Pa.) According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, female Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) were paid less than their male colleague for performing equal work, despite their superior qualifications. After a female LPN repeatedly complained about the gender-based pay disparity and requested a raise, the company retaliated against her, and ultimately terminated her. EEOC v. Inova Surgery Center, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-1721 (E.D. Va.) The EEOC alleges that the company terminated a 52-year-old employee after she requested an extension of her medical leave to recover from carpal tunnel surgery and replaced her with two co-workers, ages 24 and 35. Further, the termination and replacement occurred while the employee was still on approved medical leave, the EEOC said. KEY SETTLEMENTS SECURED IN FY 2024 EEOC v. Didlake, Inc., Case No. 8:23-cv-2618 (D. Md.) According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, the company failed to provide communications accommodations, including American Sign Language (ASL) interpreters, for deaf and hard-of-hearing employees, and it maintained a policy of terminating employees who requested medical leave but did not qualify for leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Under a five-year Consent Decree, the company must pay $1,017,500 in monetary damages and is required to update and supplement its existing policies relating to leave and reasonable accommodations, provide training to its management on the ADA, and educate all employees on how to request reasonable accommodations. EEOC v. Hatzel & Buehler, Inc., Case No. 3:23-cv-03093 (D.N.J.) The EEOC charged since at least November 2020, the vice president of the company’s New Jersey branch engaged in age discriminatory recruiting and hiring practices when he requested that recruiting companies seek out younger project manager and estimator candidates for job opportunities, and then refused to hire older workers because they did not fall within his desired age range. The same vice president failed to retain job applicant and hiring-related records in violation of federal law, per the EEOC. OH WV PA NJ Philadelphia MD DE RI EEOC Philadelphia District Office DISTRICT PROFILE Director: Jamie Williamson Regional Attorney: Debra Lawrence Merit Cases Filed in FY 2024: 16 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Failure to Conciliate: 91 Average Days Between Failure to Conciliate & Complaint: 110 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Complaint: 201 ©2025 Seyfarth Shaw LLP KEY CASES FILED IN FY 2024 EEOC-Initiated Lawsuit against a Sports & Outdoor Company: According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, an employee of a sports & outdoors company complained multiple times to human resources and management about age discrimination during an organizational restructuring. During the reorganization, the company created a new leadership role and hired several younger, less experienced employees to fill the positions without posting the positions or giving older, more experienced employees the opportunity to apply. When the employee complained that the actions constituted age discrimination, his regional manager and the company’s human resources representative warned him not to pursue his complaint up the chain, implying it would jeopardize his career. When the employee nevertheless elevated his complaint to the company’s global vice president, the company terminated him less than six weeks later the EEOC charged. EEOC v. Factor One Source Pharmacy LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-1572 (D. Col.) According to the lawsuit, the company violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) when it inquired about employee disabilities and genetic information and pressured employees to use its pharmacy services. The company unlawfully asked applicants about their hemophilia, their children’s hemophilia, and the medications they or their children took so it could recruit individuals who had hemophilia or had family members with hemophilia. KEY SETTLEMENTS SECURED IN FY 2024 EEOC v. Walmart, Inc., Case No. 3:23-cv-08118 (D. Ariz.) The EEOC filed suit alleging the company fired a cashier because she had seizures causing her to miss work. The company’s attendance policy allows for absences to be excused for disability accommodations, but after about two months, human resources personnel told her absences for her seizures would no longer be excused. The cashier submitted a written request for the accommodation as provided in the company’s attendance policy, but was fired while the request was still pending, the EEOC claimed. Per the parties’ two-year Consent Decree, the company will pay $100,000 in monetary damages, provide management and employee training, post notices, and review policies to prevent future violations of the ADA. In addition, the company will report to the EEOC for two years to ensure compliance with the Decree. WY CO UT AZ NM Phoenix EEOC Phoenix District Office DISTRICT PROFILE Director: Melinda Caraballo Regional Attorney: Mary Jo O’Neill Merit Cases Filed in FY 2024: 10 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Failure to Conciliate: 257 Average Days Between Failure to Conciliate & Complaint: 193 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Complaint: 450 ©2025 Seyfarth Shaw LLP
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4