Sexual Harassment Lawyer Blawg
Articles Posted in Sexual Harassment
Is someone at Coach Protecting an alleged Sexual Harasser?
Todd Khan, Coach CEO
In a statement under oath a Coach employee testifies that Coach CEO Todd Khan and other top Coach executives are friendly with Luis Anzola, who is the subject of a Charge of sexual harassment filed with the EEOC:
3. Top executives at Coach, including CEO Todd Khan, treated Mr. Anzola as a personal friend. When they visited the store, they made a point to seek out Mr. Anzola to chat with him as soon as they entered the store. They appeared friendly and Mr. Anzola told me that they were.
Alleged harasser at General Dynamics NASSCO Norfolk Facing Criminal Charges of Sexual Battery
A Virginia woman, “Ms. Smith” (a pseudonym), has filed an EEOC Charge alleging that General Dynamics NASSCO Norfolk failed to stop sexual harassment by her supervisor following her complaints, and went on to retaliate against her. Public court records now reflect that the supervisor is facing charges of sexual battery of Ms. Smith.
In her EEOC Charge filed in June 2024, Ms. Smith alleges that from early in her employment as a firewatch at General Dynamics NASSCO Norfolk, her supervisor—the Firewatch Coordinator—subjected her to daily sexual harassment, which included sexual remarks, unwanted touching, and sexual come-ons. For example, the Coordinator asked to touch Ms. Smith’s body parts, asked her for sexual favors, and even kissed her face and grabbed her rear end and breasts. When she resisted his sexual advances, the Coordinator falsely told Ms. Smith’s higher-level supervisor that she had an “attitude.”
Ms. Smith’s Charge explains that she complained to her higher-level supervisor about the Coordinator’s harassment, but to no end: the harassment continued, including by the Coordinator falsely telling Ms. Smith’s coworker that Ms. Smith was willing to perform sexual favors at work. Ms. Smith was humiliated by his degrading remarks about her.
A Charge of Discrimination alleges Sexual Harassment of Employees and Customers at Coach’s Flagship Store
Sexual harassment has run rampant at a Coach store in NYC, according to a Charge of Discrimination filed recently by a former employee.
Tapestry, Inc. is a global fashion holding company headquartered in New York City. Its luxury brands include Coach, Kate Spade and Stuart Weitzman. Tapestry’s sexual harassment policy is illegal: it lacks the most important protections provided under NYS law, and for years Tapestry has been ignoring complaints by women that Luis Anzola, a Craftsman who has worked at Coach for three decades at their flagship store (“the pinnacle of the Coach experience”), has been sexually harassing them.
A young woman who started at Coach when she was just 23 years old, and member of Gen Z — the very demographic that Coach is desperate to attract — has filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. It alleges that over a period of a year and a half, she made four separate complaints to the Store Manager, to Human Resources and finally to Coach’s District Manager, Brian Glass. She told them that Anzola was following her around, coming on to her, and touching her, and that he would spend up to a half hour at her workstation, staring at her and not working. Her first Store Manager agreed the behavior was unprofessional and unacceptable, and would not be tolerated. But although management assured her that it would stop, it never did.
UPDATE: Judge Orders Racial Harassment/Retaliation case against Excel to Trial
In a text Order entered May 20, the Middle District of Louisiana confirmed that Weldon Moore’s claims of racial harassment and retaliation will go to trial, which was previously scheduled to begin July 22.
Lead Counsel Shilpa Narayan successfully led the charge to challenge Excel’s efforts to have Mr. Moore’s case dismissed. For his part, Mr. Moore has withstood the challenges of litigation, fighting for justice for more than three years to have his day in court.
Read more about the case here: https://www.sexualharassmentlawyerblawg.com/excel-usa-management-testimony-reveals-retaliatory-treatment-of-african-american-employee-who-filed-racial-discrimination-suit-weldon-moore-v-excel-contractors-llc-d-b-a-excel-usa-321-cv-00698-j/
EEOC Charges: Patriot Contracting in Reno, Nevada Retaliates Against a Victim of Sexual Orientation Harassment–and the Cancer Patient Who Stood Up for his Co-Workers
A Patriot Contracting Superintendent subjected an employee to highly offensive racist and homophobic slurs—including the N word and “faggot”—and threats of violence, according to Charges of Discrimination filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) by two former Patriot employees. When the employee’s colleague stood up for the victim, the Superintendent retaliated against him, including forcing the colleague to perform work that was inappropriate and painful given his previously-disclosed status as a cancer patient, according to his own EEOC Charge.
Twenty-year-old “Kevin” (a pseudonym) had worked for Patriot as an excavator operator for five months when he was transferred to a Reno, Nevada job site supervised by a Superintendent in October 2023. This was one of his first full-time jobs, having graduated high school in 2021. “Martin” (also a pseudonym), a former law enforcement officer and highly experienced construction equipment operator, worked onsite under the Superintendent as well. As explained in the EEOC Charge he filed on March 6, 2024, when he came on board with Patriot, Martin—a valuable prospective employee who had years of relevant experience—had made clear to General Manager Ritchie Jensen that to accept the construction equipment operator position, Patriot would have to guarantee Martin wouldn’t be forced to work as a laborer. Martin had disclosed that he was a cancer patient, taking a daily medication to manage his cancer, which made laborer work painful and infeasible; he further disclosed that a preexisting knee condition also made such work unacceptable. Jensen guaranteed that Martin would only be required to operate construction equipment, not to perform a laborer’s manual work.
Unfortunately, as soon as Kevin moved to the Superintendent’s crew, the Superintendent began making extremely offensive and upsetting anti-gay slurs and remarks. As outlined in Kevin’s EEOC Charge, on a near-daily basis, the Superintendent would use the slur “faggot”—saying “hello faggot,” “what a faggot,” and similar remarks to Kevin. Before long, the Superintendent also targeted Kevin, a Native Hawaiian man, with egregious racial slurs—calling him slurs including N*****, monkey, and coon on a daily basis. The Superintendent behaved erratically and threateningly—displaying a gun to Kevin and his coworkers while announcing “this is for anyone that wants to fuck around”—and once placing Kevin in a chokehold with no warning.
A Newport News, Virginia welder for Skanska USA Building, Inc. was sexually harassed by her high-level supervisor—then abruptly fired when she refused to entertain his advances – according to recently filed EEOC Charge.
Nakeya Livermon worked as a welder for Skanska, where she participated in building infrastructure for the Portsmouth waterside. Livermon was the only female welder on site. She was known to be an excellent welder, in an industry that has few female welders at all.
As her foreman noted:
Skanska featured Livermon in its promotional materials, making her a spotlight during Women in Construction Week
Encompass, a Major Hospital Chain, Threatens to Fire Women who Complain about Sexual Harassment
This is the third in a series of blog pieces written for and reviewed by the Charging Parties which explains their ordeal
The CEO, the Head of Human Resources and the Therapy Team Leader Threaten to Fire Women who Complain about Sexual Harassment at Encompass, a Major Hospital Chain
The CEO and the Director of Human Resources at Colorado Springs were required to report to Headquarters that they were receiving numerous complaints of sexual harassment perpetrated by the same provider who had been the subject of the sexual assault allegation.
Harm Caused by Encompass’s Failure to Follow its Sexual Harassment Policy
This is the second installment of a series of blog pieces about sexual harassment at Encompass Health. After a former employee posted a link to the previous blog piece, the Interim CEO of the Colorado Springs hospital held what could fairly be called a damage-control meeting. She revealed that she had sought talking points from Encompass’ legal counsel. One of the talking points was that this blog is just “attorney advertising”. While this blog is attorney advertising, and we know that some people who read our blog visit our website, these nine women who filed Charges of Discrimination believe the blog will help to ensure that what happened at Encompass does not happen again – at Encompass or elsewhere. These blog pieces comport with the information those nine had, collectively, when they filed the Charges and what has transpired since and they want you to know this is their collective voice as well as ours.
“Encompass Health cannot resolve matters that are not brought to the attention of an appropriate member of Management.”
“Additionally, any employees, managers or supervisors who become aware of any possible unlawful harassment or other violation of this policy, whether they are personally affected or not, is directed to advise their superior, the human resources department or any senior member of administration.”
UPDATE: Lawsuit Against SCA Pharmaceuticals Will Test Reach of End Forced Arbitration Act
UPDATE: On July 16, 2024, the Court held a hearing on Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and Dismiss Plaintiff’s Constructive Discharge claims. At the end of the arguments, the Court denied Defendant’s motion in full, and subsequently issued a text Order:
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Robert N. Chatigny: Telephone Conference/Motion Hearing held on 7/16/2024 denying [29] MOTION to Compel Arbitration of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint and Motion to Dismiss Constructive Discharge Claims filed by SCA Pharmaceuticals, LLC, consistent with the comments made during the telephone conference.
The Court, during the telephone conference, stated in essence that Defendant “could not have it both ways” with respect to its contention that there was a valid and enforceable arbitration agreement situated within an Employee Handbook that specifically disclaimed that it created contractual/legal rights of any kind. In addition, the Court noted that because the employer retained for itself the right to amend or alter the rules in the Handbook at any point, if there were a contract it would be “illusory” and therefore unenforceable. Finding that there was no agreement to arbitrate, the Court did not need to reach the question whether the End Forced Arbitration Act precluded arbitration of any of Plaintiff’s claims, noting any ruling would be dicta, and that the Second Circuit Court of Appeals was poised to rule on the issue in the near future. And the Court refused to dismiss Plaintiff’s Constructive Discharge claim, determining the viability of the claim would be best addressed at summary judgment with a full record of facts.