Employment Lawyer Blog

An EEOC-championed national origin discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart has left the Bentonville, Arkansas-based megastore reeling. According to a February 8th story in the New York Times, a group of West African men allege that a Wal-Mart store in Avon, Colorado fired them because of their race and African heritage.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission allegations say that, in January 2009, a new manager took over the Wal-Mart store in Avon and promptly called a meeting of the staff -- many of whom happened to be West African. The manager allegedly said, "I don't like some of the faces I see here. There are people in Eagle County who need jobs." He also allegedly remarked, "Wow, there are a lot of Africans, and I don't like some of the faces I see here."

Subsequent to this manager's takeover, many West African employees were reportedly subject to extra criticism and stiffer workloads. One 61-year old man exhausted himself stacking boxes -- he was not physically capable of doing the work. West African employees also reported that Hispanic and white Wal-Mart associates got to take cigarette breaks, even though they were disallowed short prayer breaks.

A long time assistant night manager was quoted in the New York Times saying that the managers "were trying to get most of the Africans out... a lot of them have been there for a long time. They weren't being treated right."

Wal-Mart is no stranger to employment discrimination lawsuits. The company is currently embroiled in the biggest class action lawsuit in the history of the U.S. The case involves over 1.5 million female employees who currently (or used to) work for the retailer. In 2009, Wal-Mart paid out over $17 million in a separate class action lawsuit brought on behalf of African-American truck drivers.

If you or a co-worker or family member has suffered national origin discrimination on the job, help is a click or a phone call away. The New York City national origin discrimination law firm of Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum can provide immediate assistance for your employment-related issue. Head to our website, www.jhllp.com, for lots of free resources about discrimination topics, or call us for a free consultation at (866) 348-7394.

New York sexual harassment and gender discrimination are prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act as well as by New York State's own anti-harassment laws. This article will explore the concept of NY sexual harassment and introduce you to some generally accepted strategies for preventing it and ending it at the workplace.

The legal definition of "sexual harassment" is purposefully ambiguous. In general, any workplace conduct or sexual advance that is not welcome or that turns the work environment into a hostile or intimidating place to be can be construed as harassment. The line between appropriate and inappropriate conduct depends closely on context.

What might be acceptably flirtatious at one job might be inappropriate harassment at another. To illustrate the concept further, let's take a look at some real world examples of what would likely be construed as NYC sexual harassment:

• A sales manager demeans female customers to his subordinates by insulting or mocking their figures and style of dress.
• A bus boy gropes a waitress - pitching her buttocks or grabbing at her chest.
• A boss posts sexually explicit cartoons on his subordinate's desk as a joke.
• An employee forwards a lewd email around to co-workers that contains sexually explicit pictures or language.
• A secretary at an accounting firm becomes uncomfortable when her supervisors spend half an hour exchanging dirty jokes in the break room.

While most victims of sexual harassment are women; men can suffer harassment as well:

• For a fictitious example of female-to-male sexual harassment, see the 2009 Sandra Bullock movie, "The Proposal."
• For a real world example of NYC male-to-male sexual harassment, see the allegations recently filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against Sparks Restaurant in NYC.

Preventing harassment is an ongoing challenge for employers and employees alike.

One good place to start is a clear and well publicized policy. Employers and direct supervisors should know this policy inside and out and should convey it effectively to subordinates. Policy must be reasonable, regularly reviewed, and unambiguous.

Effective training and retraining can also prevent the spread of sexual harassment in workplaces. Unfortunately, office cultures can get corrupted by the "meme" of New York City sexual harassment. This social virus (if you will) then causes problems. For instance, some Wall Street companies are notorious for cultivating chauvinistic, if not outright, misogynistic atmospheres. Workers and supervisors who learn in this kind of environment may come to believe that it's socially acceptable to sexually harass co-workers, tell dirty jokes, and so forth.

To fix sexual harassment problems endemic to certain companies, therefore, entire office cultures may need to be re-engineered. That's no small task.

If you have been a victim of NYC sexual harassment, gender discrimination, or retaliation - or if you know a co-worker who needs help - the legal experts of Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum can help. Call us at (866) 348-7394, or connect with us through our website: www.jhllp.com. We can make a real difference and help you get compensation for lost wages or other problems you have suffered.

A long smoldering New York race discrimination allegation against the NYC Fire Department has ignited a firestorm of commentary. Judge Nicolas G. Garaufis ruled on January 14th that the NYC Fire Department had intentionally discriminated against applicants based on their race, and that the city must take immediate corrective actions.

The Vulcan Society (an organization of black New York City firefighters) applauded Judge Garaufis' decision to order the city to compensate minority firefighter applicants who applied for positions from the years 1989 to 2002. This would cover around 7,400 applicants, of whom the city is now required to hire 293. These candidates must be black or Hispanic, and some of them must be granted retroactive seniority.

Judge Garaufis stopped short of ordering the Fire Department to install a quota system for hiring minority applicants; instead, he urged all parties to work together to resolve any disputes that might arise in the execution of his orders. Judge Garaufis was quoted in the New York Times: "Achieving these basic aims [ensuring that qualified, diverse individuals come to be accepted as New York City firefighters] will require ongoing oversight, attention to many details and resolution of disputes among the parties." (New York Times; January 21st, 2010).

Allegations of discriminatory testing for firefighters are not unique to New York City. In the reverse discrimination case of Ricci v. New Haven nineteen city firefighters (seventeen of whom are white and two of whom are Hispanic) alleged that the city of New Haven discriminated against them and denied them promotions because of their race--a form of racial discrimination. All had passed a test for promotions to management but city officials invalidated the test results because none of the black firefighters who passed the exam had scored high enough to be considered for promotions. The Supreme Court decided (5-4) that New Haven's decision to ignore the test results violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

This New Haven case captured the nation's attention last summer when one of the presiding Judges, Sonia Sotomayor, got nominated by President Obama to fill a vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court.

If you or a loved one has been victimized by racial discrimination, national origin discrimination, or retaliation, legal options abound. To explore your rights and possibilities for recompense, connect with the expert team here at Joseph, Herzfeld, Hester & Kirschenbaum at (866) 348-7394, or send us an email at www.jhllp.com to initiate a free and confidential consultation with one of our top caliber attorneys.