Civilian FDNY employees file discrimination lawsuit

According to a new lawsuit, discrimination in the FDNY isn’t limited to actual firefighters.
In a new class-action lawsuit, filed by seven civilian employees Dec. 1, the New York City Fire Department is accused of racially discriminatory practices against its Black civilian employees. Black firefighters settled a lawsuit three years ago after accusing FDNY officials of discrimination. Civilian FDNY employees filed a complaint about discriminatory practices with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 2016.
The lawsuit claims that FDNY leadership hasn’t implemented human resources practices that could reduce or stop discrimination; an inside group, good old boy network has kept non-whites out of decision-making positions; white employees are promoted more and compensated more than nonwhite employees; and City Hall has failed to exercise control over the FDNY’s practices.
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, states that the FDNY’s practices violate the U.S. Civil Rights Act and New York City’s own Human Rights Law.
Plaintiff Stephanie Thomas, an African-American computer specialist, has worked for the FDNY for almost 30 years. She told reporters during a news conference at City Hall that she hasn’t received any discretionary raises (only minimal) and has been denied a promotion her entire time there.
Thomas explained, “I work very hard and have been commended for the work I do, but I have been literally stuck—for 30 years—at the same level and pay grade as recently hired computer specialists. I have received only the small raises negotiated by my union, and never a discretionary raise like my white [co-workers].”
The other six employees in the lawsuit include Annette Richardson, Deborah Bowman, Lia Horsley, Debra Poe, Dino Riojas and Arlene Simmons.
“The city is aware of this problem and has chosen to sit on its hands and do nothing,” said Sara Wyn Kane, the plaintiff’s attorney. “As stated in the lawsuit, the city’s own workforce profile data for 2014 show that 41 percent of its hires were white and 27 percent were African-American. But at FDNY, 59 percent were white and only 14 percent were African-American. In other words, FDNY hired African-Americans at only about half of the rate at which other city agencies did.”
Retired judge and well-known civil rights attorney U.W. Clemon is also part of the plaintiffs’ legal team and said that the lawsuit against the FDNY shows him that the fight is not over.
“The fight that is being waged here by these brave African-Americans is reminiscent of the earlier civil rights era, and represents a new battleground,” stated Clemon. “It’s a shame that discrimination is still rife in the Fire Department of the largest American city. I want to commend the bravery of the FDNY 7 for filing this lawsuit, knowing that they will still have to go to work every day and face the perpetrators of these discriminatory practices.”
Discrimination accusations with the FDNY aren’t new. In the 1970s the Vulcan Society (which represents Black firefighters) and the Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against the FDNY over its entry level exams, which were deemed to be discriminatory against Black and Latino applicants. Despite Federal Judge Edward Weinfeld’s order to hire one minority applicant for every three white candidates, the FDNY remained 93 percent white. In 2007, the Vulcan Society and the Department of Justice filed a class action suit against the FDNY over its “virtual exclusion” of nonwhite firefighters. Judge Nicholas Garaufis granted the plaintiffs $100 million in back pay and benefits to compensate for FDNY applicants who were improperly barred from entry.
An elected official recently commented that there shouldn’t be racism within an agency whose main job is to protect New Yorkers.
“There is no place for bigotry or hatred in the City of New York, especially when it comes to those sworn to protect New Yorkers,” said Councilwoman Vanessa Gibson in a statement. “It is disappointing and disturbing that a man who was forced out of his job as a NYC EMT for racist, sexist and anti-Semitic tweets could be sworn in as firefighter just four years later.”
The plaintiffs want the court to appoint an outside monitor or task force going forward for five years or more; require FDNY to create plans to increase representation of African-Americans in civilian positions in which they’re represented and in EMS positions above lieutenant (with the court’s approval); appoint an outside monitor to audit compensation of civilian employees; and require FDNY to view and modify its human resources practices.
By Stephon Johnson
Read the original article from The Amsterdam News

The EEOC and Sara Lee: A Landmark Discrimination Case in Texas

After a two year investigation into complaints of civil rights and health violations, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced a $4 million settlement for former employees at the Sara Lee factory located in Paris, Texas. This case marks the largest settlement in EEOC history involving a hostile work environment. The EEOC took on the case after twenty-five workers filed complaints against the company during their time at the now-shuttered factory, which closed in 2011. Attorneys now estimate that over seventy employees stand to benefit from the settlement. In addition to financial reparations, the company will be required to implement measures to prevent workplace discrimination and to submit regular reports to the EEOC. Read on for a look inside the landmark case.

THE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST SARA LEE

The EEOC’s two year investigation found that black employees were targets of intimidation and were denied promotions that went to their white peers. Black employees reported racial slurs and graffiti during their time at the factory, incidents which were corroborated by the EEOC. A lawsuit filed separately from the EEOC complaint revealed that the graffiti included racial slurs, threats, and crude drawings of apes and black men with nooses. A large portion of the alleged abuse came from white supervisors within the factory and several Sara Lee officials have been accused of ignoring complaints from black employees about the conditions within the factory. In addition, workers were reportedly exposed to black mold asbestos and other toxins during their daily work. The working conditions were so hazardous that:

One of the cake lines was nicknamed the ‘cancer line,’ because so many people were getting sick, said Sara Kane, one of the workers’ attorneys, of the law office Valli, Kane & Vagnini.

According to the investigation, black employees were exposed to these conditions while their white colleagues were promoted to positions located in safer areas of the factory. These white employees were allegedly often less-experienced than their black co-workers but they received promotions nevertheless.
According to the EEOC’s report, several black employees contracted cancer and other diseases as a direct result of their exposure to toxins in the workplace. When black employees reported their diseases to management, their complaints were either ignored or dismissed as being unrelated to working conditions within the factory. The closure of the factory in 2011 meant that the EEOC had relatively limited exposure to the physical conditions of the factory, so the investigation did rely heavily on interviews with employees.

 THE ROLE OF THE EEOC

The EEOC enforces federal laws against discrimination in most companies with 15 employees or more (although this can vary according to certain jurisdictions and circumstances). The EEOC processes both private sector and federal sector violations of discrimination laws, although it takes a more active investigative role in private sector cases. There are two distinct private sector and a federal sector mediation programs, which each offer dispute resolution with EEOC cooperation. If conciliation cannot resolve a private sector dispute, the EEOC has the right to pursue litigation and also has a right to participate in an ongoing lawsuit. According to the EEOC website,

The EEOC has the authority to investigate charges of discrimination against employers who are covered by the law. Our role in an investigation is to fairly and accurately assess the allegations in the charge and then make a finding. If we find that discrimination has occurred, we will try to settle the charge. If we aren’t successful, we have the authority to file a lawsuit to protect the rights of individuals and the interests of the public. We do not, however, file lawsuits in all cases where we find discrimination.

The EEOC may handle tens of thousands of complaints every year, but they very rarely escalate to the heights that the Sara Lee case has, which makes the future of Sara Lee critically important. If Sara Lee complies with the EEOC regulations and actively changes its workplace environment in the coming years, it will serve as a model for other companies that have had large-scale reports of discrimination. The successful transformation of the Sara Lee case will lie with its parent company–Tyson Foods.

A NEW NAME AND A NEW BRAND

In 2012, so chronologically after the alleged abuse occurred, Sara Lee went through a major re-branding, effectively splitting the business in two. The food side of the business was labeled Hillshire Brands while the tea and coffee end of the company (centered in Europe) was named D.E. Master Blenders 1753. The name change was speculated to have been prompted by lackluster sales of meat products.
In 2014, Hillshire Brands completed a merger with Tyson Foods, Inc. which The Wall Street Journal referred to as the “meat industry’s biggest deal.” After the merger, Hillshire’s chief executive Sean Connolly stepped down, clearing the way for new leadership. However, the Sara Lee discrimination case did not disappear with the name change. Although headlines associate the case with Sara Lee, Tyson is now liable for the settlement and for rebuilding the brand’s image in the wake of the EEOC investigation. In an interview with Buzzfeed News, Tyson Foods spokesperson Worth Sparkman said the company is

‘Committed to treating our team members with dignity and respect and have a policy against harassment and discrimination,’ noting Tyson Foods requires annual training and offers a toll-free help line for workers to report any concerns without fear of retaliation. ‘While we don’t agree with all of the allegations in this case, we oppose any unlawful discrimination in the workplace and believe it makes sense to resolve this matter,’ Sparkman wrote in an email. When asked which allegations the company disagrees with Sparkman said, via email, ‘We’ll point out that any alleged conduct in this case occurred before portions of Sara Lee were acquired by Tyson Foods in 2014.’

The Tyson brand has also had a series of legal skirmishes over working conditions over the past few years. This November, the Supreme Court heard a case against Tyson in which employees argued that Tyson unlawfully failed to pay for the time it took them to put on and then remove safety equipment during their daily tasks. In a lower court, employees were awarded half of what their counsel requested. The case has raised interesting questions about collective action lawsuits, as the case involves more than 3,000 workers in total: Should that many employees be allowed to file their complaint at one time, in a single case?
The Supreme Court has approached the case less as an issue of wage violations and more as a debate over what the threshold should be for the number of participants in a collective action lawsuit. Yet, if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the employees, Tyson may pay out even more than they it in the Sara Lee case–approximately $6 million.

CONCLUSION

The Sara Lee case is a unique one in that a significant number of workers were courageous enough to file complaints and patient enough to wait for the legislative process to work over several years. Not every discrimination case is investigated by the EEOC, either because there is not sufficient evidence or because victims do not feel safe reporting misconduct. Hopefully, the Sara Lee case will inspire other companies to enact preventative measures to disband discrimination. The EEOC has delivered a decisive victory for the employees of the Texas factory, and we’ll have to see what effects it might have in future discrimination cases.

By Jillian Sequeira
Read the original article from Law Street Media

Valeant Unit Settles Sex Discrimination Claims For $7.2M

Law360, Los Angeles (July 12, 2016, 4:56 PM EDT) — Valeant-owned Medicis Pharmaceutical Corp. will pay $7.2 million to settle a class action alleging gender discrimination and other claims brought by female sales representatives of the medical cosmetics company, according to a final settlement order signed by a D.C. federal judge Monday. Continue reading

Former Marshalls assistant managers sue TJX Cos.

Two former assistant store managers who worked at Marshalls have filed suit in US District Court in Massachusetts against The TJX Companies and related entities, alleging that the company violates wage and hour laws.
The suit, filed Dec. 11, names Marshalls of MA, Inc.; Marmaxx Operating Corp., doing business as Marshalls HomeGoods; Marshalls; T.J. Maxx HomeGoods; and HomeGoods, Inc. The plaintiffs are seeking class action status and are seeking compensation for allegedly unpaid wages, damages and attorney’s fees.
According to the suit, Celina Roberts worked an assistant store manager at Marshall’s in Laredo, Texas. She was hired in May 2008 and promoted in June to the assistant manager position, the suit states. Roberts worked 60 to 70 hours a week and often worked six or seven days a week, according to the suit. As an assistant store manager, she did not receive overtime for working more than 40 hours, the suit said.
Her work was “largely unrelated to the management of the store,” the suit alleges. Rather, Roberts on a daily basis stocked merchandise, cleaned, worked the register, unloaded delivery trucks and the like, the suit alleges.
Roberts alleges she complained to the store manager and to a district manager that she should be paid for the hours she was working and said that, if she had known she would end up working as many hours as an assistant manager, she would have remained a back room coordinator, “performing almost identical duties, and receiving overtime pay,” the suit states.
Plaintiff Anthony Sciotto was hired as an operations assistant store manager at Marshalls in Westbury, N.Y., the suit states, and worked at various other Marshalls locations in New York. The suit alleges that Sciotto worked a minimum of 10 hours a day, five days a week, and at times, up to 70 hours a week.
Like Roberts, the suit alleges, Sciotto largely was not performing managerial duties and was instead performing routine tasks such as stocking merchandise, unloading trucks “and other duties typically expected of hourly employees.”
Sciotto and other assistant store managers “had to perform such non-exempt duties because there were an insufficient number of hourly employees available to perform such tasks,” the suit said.
The suit alleges that Marshalls and HomeGoods stores operate under the same corporate policies and all assistant managers share the same uniform job descriptions.
A spokeswoman for The TJX Companies declined comment, citing company policy regarding pending litgiation.
The lawsuit in Massachusetts mirrors a separate case against T.J. Maxx in U.S. District Court for Eastern New York, which was filed in early 2011 by a former assistant manager in New York. Last November, a federal court judge in New York granted conditional certification for a collective action lawsuit, which is similar to a class-action suit, in that case.
The Massachusetts case against focuses on Marshalls and HomeGoods, rather than T.J. Maxx, but makes similar allegations against the Framingham company.
– Staff Writer Mary Moore, Boston Business Journal
Read the original article from Boston Business Journal here

New York Movie Shoot Parking Workers Sue Studios Over Pay

Workers who secure street parking for movie and TV shoots in the city are suing major studios, saying the studios often underpaid them for working long hours in trying conditions.
The workers, called parking production assistants, play the unglamorous role of keeping parking spaces clear for movie trucks and trailers and watching over the film vehicles in 12-hour shifts at the sets of such films as “American Hustle” and “The Bourne Legacy,” according to their federal labor law suits.
“We’re always overlooked and underpaid,” parking assistant Christian Pellot said at a news conference Wednesday. “We’re subjected to sleeping in our cars and using the bathroom in buckets … when these billion-dollar companies have the money to at least give us a Porta-Potty.”
Pellot and several other workers sued Lionsgate, NBCUniversal, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Warner Bros. and others on Tuesday.
Lionsgate is based in Santa Monica, California, and Vancouver, British Columbia. NBCUniversal is based in New York. Sony Pictures Entertainment is based in Culver City, California. And Warner Bros. is based in Burbank, California. They declined to comment Wednesday on the lawsuits, which follow similar suits in recent years.
The parking coordinators get paid a flat rate, commonly $150, for a 12-hour shift, according to their lawyer, James Vagnini.
“It should be a job that’s exciting. Who wouldn’t want to work on a set with celebrities and all these great crews?” Vagnini said, but the parking assistants have “been ignored, subjected to horrible conditions and, now, unfairly underpaid.”
The workers say they often aren’t paid for all their hours and don’t get overtime while sometimes working 80 or even more than 100 hours a week. Many use their own cars to hold parking spots and to try to stay warm or cool.
“I’ve had co-workers who have lost toes” because they couldn’t afford to idle their engines for hours, said Pellot, who has worked in the field for five years.
With no access to set restrooms unless filming is active, the parking workers have to try to use restrooms at local businesses or resort to using buckets or bottles in their cars, according to the lawsuits, which seek class action status and unspecified damages.
Meanwhile, local residents sometimes get angry with the parking assistants, said Corey Leach, who has worked in the job for eight years.
Leach settled a similar wage suit against The Weinstein Co. and others in 2012, for terms not disclosed in court documents. He said he’s now suing again in hopes of making broader changes.
– Staff Writers Rachelle Blidner and Jennifer Peltz, Associated Press
Read original article from ABC News

People Who Worked on Major Hollywood Sets Say They Were Forced to Pee in Their Cars

Corey Leach was excited about the idea of working for Hollywood, even if he lives in New York City. He found out about a job as a parking production assistant about a decade ago — the person who keeps the streets clear of cars and pedestrians when studios do a shoot in a neighborhood and guards production vehicles and equipment while they’re on set. “It seemed like an interesting job, who doesn’t want to work in Hollywood,” he said. “You’re so excited in the beginning.”
But the reality has turned out to be far from glamorous. “Once you realize the reality of it, you say, ‘Hold on, something is wrong,’” he said.
Late on Tuesday night, Leach and a group of more than 100 people who have worked as parking assistants on movie and television sets in New York City filed class action lawsuits against five major studios: Lions Gate, Ratpac-Dune, Sony, Universal, and Warner Brothers. The complaints allege that parking production assistants, or PPAs, were routinely and illegally denied wages and forced to endure inhumane conditions in their jobs. Sony declined to comment, while the other studios couldn’t be reached.
The lawsuits allege that the plaintiffs, who all worked as PPAs over the last six years, were paid flat rates of somewhere between $140 to $160 per 12-hour shift for weeks that averaged between 60 and 100 hours, sometimes more. At the same time, the complaint alleges that if PPAs were called to a site but didn’t work at least four hours, they wouldn’t be paid at all. Leach says his hours sometimes added up to more than 120 straight in a week, yet he’s seen people paid as little as $110 a shift.
The attorney representing all of the lawyers, James Vagnini, pointed out that in other cities, studios rely on police departments to do this kind of work. But in New York, studios pull workers from the same group of non-union, private-sector employees — the only people at a shoot who aren’t unionized. “When you’re skimming 100 bucks, 200 bucks off of every paycheck, it saved [studios] millions of dollars,” he said.
Perhaps even worse than the low pay, however, is some of the things the PPAs say they had to endure on the job. PPAs aren’t allowed to leave the sites for inclement weather, if the site gets shut down, to get food, or to use the restroom. “We’re out there 24 hours, we don’t have bathrooms,” Leach said. “The on-location bathroom is not made available to us.”
The solutions that the employees say they have had to resort to are disturbing. Many wear diapers; others say they had to urinate or defecate into bottles or buckets in their cars. “Holding it when you’ve got to go…over the years that wears on your body,” Leach said. “That’s unhuman.”
“They can’t control it sometimes and just go,” Vagnini added. “It’s embarrassing.”
The PPAs also say they weren’t allowed to leave the sites in the middle of cold winter weather or sweltering summer heat and weren’t allowed to bring in external heaters, instead having to run their vehicles on their own dime, as they are not compensated for gas. “In the summertime, you’re running the car because it’s hot and you need the AC,” Leach explained. “In the winter time you’re running the car because you need heat. But you’re not being reimbursed for gas or anything.”
Some stories are even more extreme. “One gentleman had to have his toes amputated because he got severe frostbite,” Vagnini said. Others reported different health effects, such as bad circulation or back issues, from sitting in their cars for such long periods.
The lawsuits seek to have the workers paid back wages that they say they are owed in unpaid minimum wage and overtime as well as damages, which could include compensation for the health impacts of their working conditions. “I think there will be some additional damages for these individuals besides pay,” Vagnini said. Besides gas, PPAs say they have to use their own vehicles and buy their own food even though other crew are fed. “They’re paying out of pocket expenses that should be paid by studios and it’s coming out of already very low pay. Take that into consideration and they’re probably not making even minimum wages.”
And while it isn’t part of the complaints, Vagnini noted that there is a racial aspect to the issue at a time when Hollywood studios are already under heavy criticism about a lack of diversity, which is showing up in this weekend’s Oscars awards. The people who do these jobs “are predominantly, if not entirely, African American and Hispanic,” he said. “I’ve yet to see any Caucasian individual that this is happening to.”
Leach has noticed the same thing. “From the top to the bottom it’s a predominantly white [business], we’re on the bottom of the totem pole,” he said. “It’s not a bunch of white people coming to this position, it’s a bunch of black and Latino people.”
– Staff Writer Bryce Covert, Think Progress
Read original article from Think Progress