Los Angeles Top Attorneys Blog: (310) 826-6300 » sexual harassment

Los Angeles Fire Department to Pay Approximately $500,000 to Settle Sexual Harassment

Los Angeles Lawyer — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 22:04:01 +0000

The Los Angeles Fire Department is about to pay nearly $500,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by one of its employees at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

For twenty-six long years, Anthony Almeida served the community of Los Angeles under the Los Angeles Fire Department. In 2007, he filed a sexual harassment lawsuit at the EEOC against the Fire Department.

In his lawsuit, Almeida stated how his fellow worker mocked him, used explicit words and called him sexual nicknames after they learned about the sexual abuse that Almeida suffered from a Catholic Church.

Despite Almeida’s repeated complaint to the management of the said Fire Department, all his efforts were proved null and vain. During their investigation regarding Almeida’s complaint, the EEOC found out that the Fire Department failed to sufficiently accommodate the complaints

It was proven in the lawsuit that the Fire Department violated the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC found a reasonable cause to believe that a violation of the law occurred.

To avoid further litigations, the Fire Department has agreed to enter a three-year conciliation agreement with the EEOC and Almeida, who is represented by his private lawyer.

Many people do not understand what comprises sexual harassment. In truth and in fact, apart from unwanted touching and comments, sexual harassment and discrimination also include dubious images display, sexual nature comments and gesture even though not totally directed to a person but are made in their presence.

In Almeida’s case, he made a wise decision by securing his own private defender in addition to the protection provided by the EEOC. Having the EEOC which provides extensive protection against harassments and discrimination for all types of employees and having Los Angeles lawyers who have dealt with hundreds of such cases of sexual harassment is a good combination.

Derogatory Remarks as a Form of Sexual Harassment and Retaliation

Los Angeles Lawyer — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 20:51:10 +0000

Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination which, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), may include the following acts:

• unwelcome sexual advances
• requests for sexual favors
• other verbal or physical conduct of sexual nature

All these acts “ constitute sexual harassment when submission to or rejection of this conduct explicitly or implicitly affects an individual’s employment, unreasonably interferes with an individual’s work performance or creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment.”

Can derogatory and offensive sexual remarks be counted as an act of sexual harassment?
Definitely – as it falls under the category of verbal and physical conduct of sexual nature based on the EEOC definition.

Similarly, this is what occurred when DynCorp International, a private military contractor and aircraft maintenance company, was sued after it allegedly subjected to a male employee to a hostile work environment based on his sex, and by transferring him after he complained.

According to the lawsuit, the harassment included daily derogatory sex-based comments with accusations that the employee is gay and engaging in homosexual acts despite knowing that the employee is married and is not gay.
When the worker complained about this unwelcome and offensive conduct, he was transferred to another site.
The worker therefore filed a lawsuit through the EEOC.

If you believe you are a victim of discrimination and harassment in the workplace, consult with our experienced Los Angeles employment and labor law attorneys. Call our toll free number at 1-866-772-2889 or email us at info@mesriani.com for a free case analysis.

Teen Farm Worker to be Paid $20,000 after Sexual Harassment and Retaliation

Los Angeles Lawyer — Tue, 12 Apr 2011 03:18:58 +0000

Sexual harassment is prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and under the same law, it is considered as illegal to retaliate against an employee because he or she complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit.

Some of the most vulnerable employees to sexual harassment and retaliation are young workers, especially those who are working in the agricultural industry.

In Los Angeles, a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against the Adams Brothers Farming, Inc. was recently settled. A teen Latina, who worked as a vegetable packer for the farm in Santa Maria, California, will be paid $20,000 in monetary relief, after she was sexually harassed by her supervisor and fired within 2 weeks after her complaint.

In the lawsuit filed by the EEOC, the teen has allegedly worked for Adam Brothers in 2004 and 2005 without incident until a male supervisor began to harass her in 2006. She was subjected to unwelcome sexual advances and requests, the supervisor initiated inappropriate physical contact, made lewd gestures, asked her for oral sex, and grabbed her private parts. However, when she reported the harassment to the foreman, within 2 weeks from her complaint, she was transferred, disciplined, and eventually, fired in June 2006.

Aside from the financial compensation awarded to the teen, $7,500 will also go to Proteus, Inc., a non-profit organization for farm workers in California’s central valley. The farm has also agreed to revise existing policies and complaint procedures as well as conduct sexual harassment, discrimination, and retaliation training for all staff in English and Spanish.

Sexual harassment is one of the most common employment law violations. However, there are many employees who experience and suffer through such abuse because they are afraid of losing their jobs, especially in this tough economy. Retaliation however, should not deter victims of sexual harassment from pursuing a complaint or a case against their abusers because there are laws that protect and uphold their rights.

Go to http://www.mesrianilaw.com or call the Mesriani Law Group at their toll free number at 1-866-325-4529 or email them at info@mesriani.com for sexual harassment or retaliation complaints.

Sexual Harassment Suit Settled by ABM Industries for $5.8 million

Los Angeles Lawyer — Sat, 04 Sep 2010 00:23:28 +0000

With more and more women making up the work force, there are just as many female employees who suffer gender discrimination, sexual harassment and abuse at the hands of employers, managers, or even colleagues. Some women suffer in silence, but for some, like the female employees of ABM Industries Inc, it’s time to stand up for their rights.

Following a lawsuit filed the by US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in behalf of 21 female workers for sexual assault and harassment, the national janitorial services company has decided to settle the suit.

The suit, which was filed in 2007 against ABM Industries Inc. and two subsidiaries, alleged that male supervisors sexually harassed the female employees for years. According to the EEOC, the supervisors exposed themselves to the female workers and engaged in unwelcome sexual conduct such as touching and groping them the women.

It was further disclosed by the EEOC that one of the errant supervisors was a registered sex offender and that at least one female employee has been raped at work.

Although ABM does not admit any fault in the allegations, it settled the case for $5.8 million to the 21 female workers.

Aside from the settlement, the company has been ordered to designate an equal employment monitor and set up a toll-free hotline for complaints.

Sexual harassment is one of the most common violations of employment rights. In fact, in 2009, the EEOC received as many as 12,696 filed by both female and male employees.

But sexual harassment or cases of it is not exactly cut and dried – what is prohibited by law is unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.

Simple teasing or offhand comments which are isolated incidents cannot be considered as sexual harassment. What is important is that the harassment based on one’s gender is so frequent and severe that it creates a hostile work environment. Any adverse employment decision such as getting fired or deprivation of benefits can also be a result of sexual harassment.

Victims of sexual harassment or gender discrimination, unless otherwise extended by their state laws, have 180 days to file a complaint. Time is of the essence so unless you want to tolerate or condone such abuse, filing a sexual harassment lawsuit or report with the EEOC should be done as soon as possible.

Starbucks Settles Sexual Harassment Suit with Former Teen Barista

Los Angeles Lawyer — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 03:40:51 +0000

Coffee conglomerate Starbucks has settled a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by a former teen barista in California for an undisclosed amount of money.

Kati Moore, who was 16 years old when she first worked in Starbucks, claimed that the company failed to protect her when her 24-year-old supervisor Tim Horton, would demand for sex.

Allegedly, Horton sent her hundreds of text messages wherein he would summon her for sex and even texted her, “I’d like to f— tomorrow.” Moore also stated that other Starbucks supervisors and managers were aware of what was happening but did not do anything to stop it.

In his defense, Horton claimed that he did not know Moore was 16. He was sentenced to serve four months in prison when he pleaded guilty to a felony charge of illegal sex with a minor.

Although Starbucks initially said that it was confident it would not be found at fault since Horton and Moore supposedly concealed their illegal relationship, the company changed its mind and instead cut a deal with the complainant.

While Starbucks has a concrete policy against sexual harassment and managers dating baristas, it actually had no rules or policies regarding relationships with teen employees under the age of 18.

The settlement between Moore and Starbucks also did not disclose whether the company would create new rules to protect its teen employees against sexual harassment.

According to experts, Moore’s case is not an uncommon occurrence in the workplace, particularly in fast food restaurants. Among all other employees, teen workers are more vulnerable to sexual harassment. In fact, according to a study from Maine, 1 out of 3 high school students experience unwanted sexual advances in the workplace.

Under the law, it is illegal for an employer or a person with influence or moral ascendency to sexually harass an employee. This offense is further exacerbated if the employee is a minor as for most states, it is a crime to have sex with a minor.

Teenagers are vulnerable to many workplace or labor law violations simply because often, they do not know any better. It is the duty of the employer to make sure that the rights of their teen employees are protected and upheld.

Miguel Cotto Punched With a Sexual Harassment Case

Los Angeles Lawyer — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 05:32:23 +0000

After taking a beating from Manny Pacquiao, boxing luminary Miguel Cotto has taken a legal blow after Martha Chacon Acevedo, a former employee, has sued him for sexual harassment.

In the suit filed in U.S. district court in San Juan last Aug. 24, the woman claimed that the former boxing champion made unwanted sexual and romantic advances towards her while she worked as an administrator in a residential property owned by Cotto in Puerto Rico.

She alleged that he offered her money and other benefits such as lingerie, lotions and body creams, champagne, and supposedly pornographic DVDs which turned out to be “Sex and the City” and “Nip/Tuck”.

According to her lawsuit, the woman consented to have sexual relations with Cotto for fear of losing her job. Acevedo further claimed that when she reported the sexual harassment to Cotto’s father, he condoned his son’s actions and told her to give in. But she allegedly got fired in October 2008, when she broke off the relationship.

She is now seeking worth more than $500,000 in damages. Cotto’s camp however, has derided the sexual harassment claim and said it was a total fabrication.

Sexual harassment, whether committed against a female or male employee is against the law. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in particular, defines sexual harassment as unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature. Offensive remarks about a person’s sex can also be considered sexual harassment.

Whether the sexual harassment is Quid Pro Quo (“something for something” or a job benefit in return for sexual favor) or it is a hostile environment sexual harassment, can file a case of sexual harassment against the employer if the employer still persists in making unwanted sexual advances or retaliates against the employee for refusing to grant sexual favors.

Employees who are a victims of sexual harassment, may also course their complaints through the EEOC within 180 days from the commission of the offense.