18th Annual Workplace Class Action Report - 2022 Edition

Annual Workplace Class Action Litigation Report: 2022 Edition 41 • Barring the employment of or contracting with two supervisors who allegedly harassed Black employees. • Prohibit the business owner’s spouse from having direct contact with employees; and • Hire previously rejected Black applicants who still wanted jobs at the company. The top 10 settlements in 2021 involving significant injunctive relief provisions include: 1. Morgan, et al. v. United States Soccer Federation, Inc. , Case No. 19-CV-1717 (C.D. Cal. April 12, 2021). The Court granted final settlement approval of a class action lawsuit brought by current and former female soccer players against the United States Soccer Federation, Inc. ("USSF") alleging gender discrimination. Plaintiffs alleged that the USSF discriminated against them by paying them less; denying them equal playing, training, and travel conditions; denying equal promotion of their games; and denying equal support and development of their games as compared to their male counterparts. In addition to providing monetary relief, the USSF agreed to policy changes that will provide female players with equal travel accommodations, facilities, and professional support. 2. Caldwell, et al. v. UnitedHealthcare Insurance Co. , Case No. 19-CV-2861 (N.D. Cal. July 7, 2021). In an ERISA class action alleging that UnitedHealthcare improperly denied coverage for lipedema – which is a chronic buildup of fat tissue that affects mainly women and causes pain, mobility problems, and joint disorders – the settlement provides that UnitedHealthcare will expand its coverage of liposuction to treat lipedema and reprocess claims that were previously denied. The coverage will further provide that liposuction is medically necessary in the event certain criteria are met. UnitedHealthcare further agreed to allow resubmission of claims that were previously denied and to review new claims under the updated coverage guidelines. 3. Hernandez, et al. v. VES McDonald ’ s , Case No. RG 20064825 (Cal. Super. Ct. Aug. 12, 2021). The Court granted a preliminary injunction in a class action alleging that McDonald’s failed to provide proper safety measures to employees during the COVID-19 pandemic. The McDonald’s franchise owner and managers also agreed to participate in meeting with crew members on a worker safety committee to discuss solutions for maintaining a safe and healthy workplace, including providing sick leave and safety equipment, and conducting contact tracing. 4. EEOC v. Danny’s Restaurant, LLC , Case No. 16-CV-769 (S.D. Miss. Aug. 16, 2021). After the Court previously awarded back wages and approved a consent decree in a lawsuit alleging that Black adult club dancers who were subjected to race discrimination, the Court subsequently ordered that the employer failed to show that reoccurring violations were unlikely. The Court granted the EEOC’s motion for injunctive relief, requiring the employer to appoint an outside human resources consultant as an injunctive relief manager, revise and post-anti-discrimination policies in locker rooms, establish a toll-free confidential hotline for reporting job bias, provide further EEO training to employees, and bind all injunctive relief on any purchaser of the business. 5. EEOC v. CCC Group , Case No. 20-CV-610 (N.D.N.Y. Aug. 10, 2021). The Court approved a consent decree in a lawsuit alleging that CCC Group subjected Black employees to racial discrimination. The consent decree required CCC Group to conduct company-wide training for employees and managers regarding harassment and discrimination issues in the construction industry; conduct a “lessons learned” presentation for all CCC Group business unit managers that focused on the lawsuit’s allegations, the consent decree, and anti-harassment training; appoint an EEO Manager; and provide periodic reporting to the EEOC regarding any future allegations of racial harassment. Finally, the consent decree bars CCC Group from employing or contracting with two White supervisors who served as foremen for CCC Group and whom the EEOC alleged harassed Black employees. 6. James, et al. v. Old Republic National Title Insurance Co. , Assurance No. 21-057 (N.Y. Antitrust Bureau Sept. 3, 2021). Following an investigation by the Attorney General of the State of New York, an assurance of discontinuance was entered to cease any no-poach agreements in the title insurance