©2025 Seyfarth Shaw LLP EEOC-INITIATED LITIGATION: 2025 EDITION | 52 51 | EEOC-INITIATED LITIGATION: 2025 EDITION ©2025 Seyfarth Shaw LLP EEOC v. Nature’s Herbs & Wellness Center d/b/a High Plainz Strains, Case No. 1:24-cv-02706 (D.S.C) According to the EEOC’s Complaint, the company failed to reasonably accommodate a budtender’s disabilities after she disclosed her disabilities to her manager and requested accommodation. When the employee complained about disability discrimination, the company suspended her without pay and later fired her. In internal communications regarding the employee’s termination, the owner of the company instructed human resources to “cut [the employee] loose” because she did not divulge her disabilities when she was hired, and the human resources manager referred to the employee as a “fruitcake.” The parties entered into a two-year Consent Decree whereby the company agreed to may $95,000 in monetary damages and to refrain from discriminating based on disability or retaliating against employees in the future, to revise its policies and practices to ensure it provides reasonable accommodations to individuals with disabilities, provide annual training on the ADA to employees in all seven locations and report to the EEOC on any complaints of disability discrimination during the Decree’s two-year term. KEY CASES FILED IN FY 2024 EEOC v. HCL America, Inc., Case No. 5:24-CV-04694 (N.D. Cal.) According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, in July 2021, the company interviewed an applicant for a sales director position. Although the applicant met the job qualifications, the hiring manager emailed the hiring team after the interview, described the applicant as a “good guy, but he is too old,” and then asked recruiters to send him applications from nonIndian candidates. Emails between recruiters and managers ranking as high as vice presidents revealed that the company set aside applications from qualified Indian applicants and discussed relaxing the job qualifications while searching for non-Indian candidates, the EEOC found. The company hired a younger, non-Indian candidate for the sales director position. EEOC v. Insurance Auto Auctions, Inc., Case No. 4:24-cv-06848 (N.D. Cal.) The EEOC alleges that a yard attendant at the company’s facility endured constant racial slurs, including the “n-word,” up to 15 times a day by co-workers for over a year. This verbal harassment occurred openly in front of the general manager who failed to take adequate steps to curb the misconduct, despite directly observing it, per the EEOC. A manager was even told by several employees that it was acceptable to say the “n-word” in the Bay Area. The Black employee felt he had no choice but to quit to escape the hostile work environment. WA MT ID NV CA OR San Francisco AK WA MT ID NV CA OR San Francisco AK EEOC San Francisco District Office DISTRICT PROFILE Director: Christopher Green Regional Attorney: Roberta Steele Merit Cases Filed in FY 2024: 7 ©2025 Seyfarth Shaw LLP KEY SETTLEMENTS SECURED IN FY 2024 EEOC v. SmartTalent, LLC, Case No. 2:22-cv-01102 (W.D. Wash.) According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, since at least 2015, the company engaged in a pattern of discrimination against women in hiring and job assignments. When the staffing agency received requests for male workers from some clients, the company complied with those discriminatory requests instead of declining them as unlawful. The company denied female workers job placement opportunities, and discouraged some of its own recruiters who voiced concerns about such discrimination, the EEOC charged. Per the parties’ three-year Consent Decree, the company will pay $875,000 in monetary damages, and is required to retain an independent consultant to draft and implement policies and procedures prohibiting discrimination against female workers and investigate all complaints of discrimination, retain a third party to train its managers and recruiters on the requirements of Title VII and the company’s new anti-discrimination policies and to hold management and recruiters accountable for compliance with its anti-discrimination policies and procedures through written evaluations and active monitoring. EEOC v. Monson Fruit, Co. LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-03133 (E.D. Wash.) The EEOC alleged that a Latina agricultural worker faced sexual harassment including repeated unwelcome advances and requests for sex from a manager in 2019. After she rejected his propositions and reported the conduct, Monson fired her coworker husband in retaliation, the agency alleged. The company’s management failed to act on reports of the harassment, the EEOC further charged. Pursuant to the parties’ three-year Consent Decree, the company will pay $250,000 in monetary damages and has agreed to implement additional policies and procedures to bolster its compliance with Title VII, including a new reporting hotline and trainings for supervisors and managers on investigative techniques for sexual harassment investigations. The company will also remove the alleged harasser from any supervisory positions. KEY CASES FILED IN FY 2024 EEOC v. Urologic Specialists of Oklahoma Inc., Case No. 4:24cv452 (N.D. Okla.) The EEOC charges the specialty medical practice did not allow a medical assistant at its facility to sit, take breaks, or work part-time as her physician said was needed to protect her health and safety during the final trimester of her high-risk pregnancy. Instead, the practice forced her to take unpaid leave and refused to guarantee she would have breaks to express breastmilk. When she would not return to work without those guaranteed breaks, the company terminated her, the EEOC alleged. EEOC St. Louis District Office DISTRICT PROFILE Director: David Davis Regional Attorney: Andrea Baran Merit Cases Filed in FY 2024: 6 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Failure to Conciliate: 45 Average Days Between Failure to Conciliate & Complaint: 179 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Complaint: 224 NE KS OK MO IL St. Louis ©2025 Seyfarth Shaw LLP
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4