Articles Tagged with sex discrimination

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 has been criminally convicted of sexual battery of Ms. Smith, less than five months after she filed a police report.

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.

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.

EH-building-300x168

Encompass Health runs a chain of rehabilitation hospitals across the United States. It is enjoying record revenues. However, Charges of Discrimination and Retaliation filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) by nine current or former women employees of the Encompass Colorado Springs hospital threaten its success.

For revenue growth, Encompass depends on expansion and keeping its facilities at maximum capacity, which in turn depends on growing its referrals. Rehabilitation hospitals receive most of their referrals from discharge planners—social workers and case managers—at acute care hospitals or other health care facilities. Case Management and Social Work is a woman-dominated field. Encompass competes with other rehabilitation hospitals for referrals from these women. Encompass’s women employees rated it fifth among six major competitors according to a Comparably study done in 2022.

Continue reading

Passed 50 years ago in June, Title IX has had a profound and widely-recognized impact on girls’ and women’s sports. But Title IX did not only offer parity in sports. It has been instrumental in compensating victims of discrimination and harassment by teachers, coaches, professors and other students. Until now. The Supreme Court quietly eviscerated this right just before Title IX’s anniversary, with little fanfare or public outrage. In a decision superficially limited to the Rehabilitation Act and the Affordable Care Act, the Court eliminated damages under Title IX – and Title VI — for emotional distress.

Victims of sex and gender-based discrimination and harassment have successfully used Title IX to obtain relief when recipients of federal funds have failed to enforce the law. In Hawaii, for example, a jury awarded $810,000 after a ninth-grade girl with the intellectual ability of a second grader was raped by an older boy from her class. The girl’s mother previously had expressed concerns to the school about this student. In California, a male student was alleged to have pressured a middle school girl into sending nude pictures and used those pictures to blackmail her into performing oral sex; students then posted pictures on social media of the female student performing oral sex. She obtained a $2 million dollar settlement. In Florida, a jury awarded a single plaintiff $6 million dollars after a teacher sexually abused her during her junior and senior years in school. The abuse included child pornography and forcible kissing and touching. The school had previously received reports of sexual abuse but failed to investigate. In Colorado, a school district settled a claim for $5 million dollars. A teacher was alleged to have sexually abused a student when she was nine years old. The school knew the teacher had a history of inappropriate conduct but failed to act to prevent the abuse. Based on the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Cummings v. Keller Premier Rehab, were claims like those brought today under Title IX, there could be no award for their depression, their suicide attempts, their eating disorders, their missed classes, their trauma.

In 1972, Congress enacted Title IX so that federal funds would not support discriminatory practices. The law bars educational programs or activities that accept federal funds from engaging in discrimination on the basis of sex. In other words, schools must take action to prevent and address sexual harassment and discrimination. Failing to do so could lead to the loss of important federal dollars (although in reality, that rarely if ever happens). Title IX was patterned after Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination by funding recipients with respect to race, color and national origin. Although neither statute expressly provides victims of discrimination with the right to sue in court, in 1979, after a female student alleged she was denied admission to medical school because of her sex, the Supreme Court held in Cannon v. University of Chicago, that Title IX (and Title VI) allowed her to sue in court. Over a decade later, in 1992, when a high school student sued alleging her teacher had sexually harassed and abused her, the Court confirmed that the right to bring suit included the ability to obtain money damages. This apparent expansion of rights may have peaked in the mid-90s: soon after, in its 1998 decision Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School District,, the Court restricted when schools could be held liable for harassment.

Contact Information