Return to Home PageIn this Title VII suit, the Los Angeles District Office alleged that employees were subjected to daily harassment in the form of offensive and stereotyping comments about their race (African American), gender (female), and national origin (Hispanic) by Jeffrey Lo, the president and owner of defendant, a manufacturer and international distributor of computer networking components. The case was resolved by a three-year consent decree, which can be extended if the district court determines that defendant has failed to comply with any of its terms. The decree requires defendant to pay a total of $350,000 in damages to be distributed among three charging parties and seven class members. Defendant agrees not to engage in harassment based on race, gender, or national origin and not to retaliate against persons who engage in protected conduct. Defendant must retain and pay for the services of an EEO consultant, who will evaluate defendant's antiharassment policy and complaint procedures, investigate complaints, and recommend remedial measures. In addition, the consultant will establish a daily 12-hour hotline for complaints regarding harassment, retaliation, and other forms of discrimination by defendant's president Jeffrey Lo and other high-level company officials.
In this ADA suit, the Detroit District Office alleged that defendant denied reasonable accommodations to charging party, a housekeeping department employee with vision and hearing impairments. Charging party is deaf and has a 10-degree field of vision while a normal field is 180 degrees. Defendant denied charging party's requests for a sign language interpreter and a modified start time to her work schedule. Without an interpreter, charging party was unable to understand the staff meetings since her ability to read lips and comprehend written materials is limited; and without an earlier start time of 2 p.m. instead of 4:45 p.m., she had difficulty obtaining transportation to work. Defendant later fired charging party following its investigation of a physical altercation between charging party and a coworker who in the past had mocked her and called her a "deaf blind bitch." Throughout the investigation charging party asked for a sign language interpreter so that she could explain what happened, but defendant refused to provide one or to allow charging party's brother to interpret. Defendant suspended the coworker for several days but fired charging party. Eight weeks later, charging party was reinstated without backpay in resolution of a union grievance. The case was resolved by a settlement agreement that requires defendant to pay $52,000 in monetary relief to charging party. Defendant also agreed to provide charging party with a sign language interpreter at all staff meetings and meetings involving personnel matters such as benefits, disciplinary issues, or wages. Additionally, defendant agreed to provide charging party with an alpha pager to enable her to communicate with her supervisors and coworkers as needed, and to engage in an interactive process with charging party in the event she needs future accommodations. Defendant also agrees to comply with the ADA and to engage in the interactive process with disabled employees who request an accommodation.
This page was last modified on March 1, 2004.