10 McDonald’s Employees Sue for Sexual Harassment, Race Discrimination, and Wrongful Termination

Ten former employees of a Virginia McDonald’s filed a civil rights lawsuit against the fast food giant. The employees allege that their supervisors subjected them to racial and sexual harassment and wrongfully terminated them. Nine of the employees are African-American, one is Hispanic, and seven are women. The plaintiffs are seeking lost wages, emotional distress, and other damages from the suit—which is being supported by the South Boston NAACP.

Some examples of harassment that the employees alleged they endured includes:

  1. Supervisors touched female employees inappropriately.
  2. Supervisors sent female employees sexually inappropriate images.
  3. Supervisors solicited sex from female employees.
  4. Supervisors complained that there were too many black people in the store.
  5. Supervisors referred to African-American employees as “bitch”, “ghetto”, and “ratchet”. 
  6. Supervisors referred to Hispanic employee as a “dirty Mexican”.
  7. Supervisors punished African-American workers for breaking rules, while white employees got away with similar infractions.
  8. Supervisors devised a plan to reduce the number of African American employees working at the franchise.
  9. Nine employees were fired because they didn’t “fit the profile”.
  10. Employees were criticized about their hair or looks.

The suit is charging both McDonald’s corporate and the local franchise. The plaintiff’s attorney, Paul Smith, believes that McDonald’s corporate controls every aspect of the franchise including mandating policies and training supervisors how to deal with harassment. McDonald’s neither denied or confirmed the allegations but claims to have a “long standing history of embracing the diversity of employees, independent Franchisees, customers and suppliers.”

*image by Flickr

Email or Call Shirazi Law Firm for a consultation: 310-400-5891. Join us on the following networks for the latest legal news:

Shirazi law firm employment law newsletter

Sexually Harassed Farmworkers Win $17 Million

Sandra Lopez, an immigrant from Chiapas Mexico, along with five other women, recently won a $17 million sexual harassment suit against their employer, Moreno Farms, a packing plant in Florida. According to the suit Lopez and the five women were subjected to graphic acts of sexual harassment that included rape, attempted rape, propositioning, and groping by three male supervisors. 

According to the Miami New Times, Lopez said she was dragged into her supervisor’s trailer and raped for half an hour. The other five women claimed they were fired when they didn’t comply with their supervisors’ sexual advances. 

Despite the large sum awarded to the women, collecting the money will be very difficult. As the case was coming to an end, Moreno Farms shut down and the owner fled to avoid going to jail.

Even though the women may never see a cent, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission still believes that the ruling was significant.  That’s because it shows farmworkers that they have rights despite their current immigration status. The EEOC is committed to protecting immigrants and vulnerable populations that are being subjected to discrimination and harassment by their employers.

Do you think that immigrants are particularly vulnerable to workplace sexual harassment? 

*image by Unsplash

Email or Call Shirazi Law Firm for a consultation: 310-400-5891. Join us on the following networks for the latest legal news:

Shirazi law firm employment law newsletter

Uber and Airbnb Executives Sued for Sexual Harassment and Overtime

Julieta Yang, a 45 year old mother of three from the Philippines and live-in domestic worker is suing her power couple former employers for alleged sexual harassment and wage theft.

Yang claims that her employers, Cameron Poetzscher, (the head of corporate development for Uber) and Varsha Rao (the head of global operations for Airbnb), subjected her to a sexually hostile work and home environment during her time of employment. She also claims they failed to pay her for minimum wage and overtime. 

The San Franciscan tech executives, who have two children, first hired Yang in March 2008 while they were living in Singapore. Yang claims that Poetzscher would watch her cook dinner for the family, all the while being completely naked. When Rao traveled for work, the sexual harassment got worse for Yang. According to the suit, Yang was subjected to Poetzscher’s frequent nudity, sexual comments, sexual advances, and unwanted touching including rubbing his groin against her. Poetzscher warned Yang about complaining to Rao because she would get angry. 

In July of 2013, the couple moved to San Francisco. They offered to triple Yang’s salary if she made the move with them. Though she signed a contract stating that she worked 30 hours a week for $12.50 an hour, Yang actually worked much more than that per week. In fact, she was paid a fixed rate of $450 per week regardless of the actual hours she worked. Yang also claims that she was not given legally mandated meals or breaks. 

While in San Francisco, the inappropriate behavior continued. 

  1. Poetzscher would often disrobe in the room that Yang was working in.
  2. Poetzscher asked Yang to give him a massage using a rolling pin. He later apologized saying he was not supposed to act that way in the US.
  3. Poetzscher would use the toilet with the door open. 
  4. When Yang asked to talk to Pao about the behavior, Pao told her that she didn’t have time to talk and that Poetzscher would have to handle it. 

The San Francisco tech executives claim that Yang’s allegations are completely false. Pao and Poetzscher claim that Yang was part of the family for seven years and just up and left in April.

Do you think live in domstic workers are more vulnerable to this sort of harassment? 

Email or Call Shirazi Law Firm for a consultation: 310-400-5891. Join us on the following networks for the latest legal news:

Shirazi law firm employment law newsletter

Con-Edison to Pay $3.8 Million for Gender Discrimination and Sexual Harassment to Over 300 Women

Consolidated Edison, one of the largest energy companies in the United States, just settled a gender discrimination and sexual harassment lawsuit with more than 300 women employees totaling $3.8 million.

The female employees that filed the lawsuit claim that they were harassed, paid less than male employees doing similar work, and not given promotions because of their gender. In addition, female employees also allegedly endured the following:

  1. One female employee was given a form with graphic images of female body parts. 
  2. One female employee alleges a male co-worker purposely ran in to her parked truck. 
  3. When any of the female employees had discrepancies in the workplace they were labeled as “angry”. 
  4. An employee claims she was terminated as retaliation when she filed a discrimination complaint. 
  5. The investigation, which began in 2007, was the result of Consolidated-Edison failing to address the hostile working environment complaints alleged by female employees. Female employees were feeling they had to ‘’toughen up’ in order to continue working in the “boy’s club”. 

Payouts will begin being distributed amongst 300 female employees. Each employee will receive $5,000 and then Consolidated-Edison has an additional pool of money set aside for employees that experienced repeated or more severe cases of harassment, termination or retaliation.

The settlement sends a message to Consolidated-Edison, employers across New York state, as well as companies nationwide, that sexual harassment will not be tolerated. Attorney General Eric Schneiderman recently went on record saying that “All women—especially those working in male-dominated workplaces—deserve respect and equal treatment.” We agree. 

*image by Reeve Jolliffe, Flickr

Email or Call Shirazi Law Firm for a consultation: 310-400-5891. Join us on the following networks for the latest legal news:

Shirazi law firm employment law newsletter

Employees Awarded $12 million in Sexual Harassment Lawsuit for Being Called Sluts and Accused of Having STD’s

A call center in Indianola, Iowa was recently sued by five female employees for sexual harassment. Danielle Rennenger, one of the plaintiffs, claims that she and other female employees were called derogatory names such as ‘whore’ and ‘slut’ on a daily basis during their time of employment. In addition, Rennenger also claims that she was accused of having sexually transmitted diseases at work and also forced to sit on the lap of a male co-worker.  The harassers, supervisor and co-worker, were also accused of holding up money and asking Rennenger to dance. When she complained, Rennenger claims that she was laid off in retaliation. 

Amme Roush, another plaintiff, claims that her supervisor asked her what her favorite sexual position was. When she called in sick one day, the same supervisor told the office it was because she had a sexually transmitted disease. In addition, she also alleges that she (and other female employees) were referred to as sluts and other derogatory names. 

Though a jury returned a $11.9 million verdict in Rennenger’s favor, collecting the money might prove to be very difficult. Because $10 million total was awarded in punitive damages against four independent companies (Manley Toy Direct LLC, Toy Network LLC, SLB Toys USA Inc, and Aquawood, LLC), it will be very difficult for Rennenger to collect money from any one company. Rennenger’s attorney believes that the corporate structure of the call center was set up in a way to protect the companies from lawsuits such as these. 

Though Rennenger has yet to receive any money from the lawsuit, she feels happy knowing that the jury ruled in her favor and that the harassment is out in the open and on record. 

What do you think of these crazy allegations?

*image by Michael Lokner, Flickr

Email or Call Shirazi Law Firm for a consultation: 310-400-5891. Join us on the following networks for the latest legal news:

Shirazi law firm employment law newsletter

Rihanna Financial Manager Sued for Race and Sex Discrimination Because of Alleged Statement that Rihanna is “Hot”

Robert Solomon, a former employee at Flynn Family Office, a New York-based financial management firm, has filed a lawsuit against the company because he opposed racist and sexist comments made by his co-workers. Solomon, who was once the company’s marketing head, also claims that he was teased by his co-workers because of his age.

According to the court papers, Solomon claims that co-workers regularly made comments about the attractiveness of women as well as their skin color. A partner at the firm, Alan Kufeld, allegedly made racist comments including one about Rihanna, one of the firm’s clients. Chuffed said she was ‘hot’, but only because she was not ‘too dark.’ He then went on to rate which Caribbean nationalities were more attractive based on their skin color. When Kufeld wasn’t making racist comments about his clients, he allegedly rated the attractiveness of his female employees with Rick Flynn, the chief operating officer of the firm. 

Flynn denies the accusations saying that “FFO has always championed the rights of women and minorities, particularly in the workplace.”

In addition to Rihanna, some of Flynn Family Office’s celebrity clients include Kelly Rippa, Katie Holmes and Tory Burch. 

Do you think these facts are severe or pervasive enough to create a case for discrimination?

*image by Flickr

Email or Call Shirazi Law Firm for a consultation: 310-400-5891. Join us on the following networks for the latest legal news:

Shirazi law firm employment law newsletter

Sexual Harassment at Southern California College

Two female students at Cypress College, Gabriela Rodas and Porcia Ruiz, are suing the school for failing to take their sexual harassment claims seriously. The students allege that they were sexually harassed by their Spanish 102 professor Edgar Alex Herrera in the fall of 2013. When they complained, they were allegedly told by an administrator that the teacher had his rights.The girls are now suing the school because the school’s administration failed to fulfill their legal obligation of reporting the sexual harassment. Instead, they were told that transfer to a different school might be the best option. 

Some of the things the students claim Herrera did include complimenting their outfits, touching them, giving them unwanted hugs, and suggestively sizing them up. At one moment, he also allegedly told one of the girls that he wished he could say more, but that he was afraid he would get in trouble for being inappropriate.This comment suggests that Herrera was aware of the boundaries he was crossing.

In addition to sexual harassment, the students are also alleging civil rights violations, gender discrimination, and negligence. 

Failure to adequately investigate and prevent claims of sexual harassment is illegal for employers.  What do you think the College’s duties were here?

Interested in reading more sexual harassment cases? Check out this one that occured at UCLA or this one that happened at UC-San Diego.

*image by Sodanie Chea, Flickr

Email or Call Shirazi Law Firm for a consultation: 310-400-5891. Join us on the following networks for the latest legal news:

Shirazi law firm employment law newsletter

County of Los Angeles Votes for Minimum Wage Increase SImilar to City of LA’s $15 per Hour by 2020

UPDATE: (July 22, 2015) The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors just voted to incrementally raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour in unincorporated areas of the county over the next five years.

Following in the footsteps of Seattle and San Francisco, the city of Los Angeles recently voted to raise its minimum wage to $15 an hour by the year 2020 and then indexed to inflation thereafter. To put the increase in perspective, an average minimum-wage full-time worker will now receive an extra $3,000 per year.  

The first increase will be to $10.50 an hour starting July 1, 2016.  Then increased each year until July 2020, when the minimum wage will be $15 an hour. Two years later, increases will be pegged to the Consumer Price Index.  Businesses with less than 25 employees get an additional year before having their minimum wage hiked.

Like most laws, this will have winners and losers.  This is seemingly great news for minimum-wage workers, but consider the affect the increase will have on small businesses or entrepreneurs. In order to avoid a loss of profits, some businesses will be forced to move their companies to a neighboring city, raise prices, decrease their total number of employees, reduce the quality of their services, or close all together. The question is how many businesses.

This will likely hit the restaurant industry the hardest.  Restaurants fought hard to get the City Council to include tips in this new minimum wage calculation, but failed.  According to Forbes.com, after the city of Seattle raised its minimum wage to $15 an hour, they saw an increase of restaurant closures. Some people are saying up to 25% of all restaurants in the City of LA may close or move to neighboring cities.  Restaurants may also get creative by eliminating tipping and instead raising menu prices significantly and adding a service charge.  

While supporters of the minimum-wage increase believe this will lift the families of full-time workers out of poverty, the critics are not so sure. Instead, they believe the wage increase will have an inflationary affect, driving rents and other prices up. 

Do you think a large jump in the minimum wage for an individual city is a good idea? Consider the affect these increases have on things such as small business profits, unemployment, exodus of employers to neighboring cities.  How easy would it be for most small business to move to neighboring cities like Santa Monica, Culver City, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills etc.? 

*image by Flickr

Email or Call Shirazi Law Firm for a consultation: 310-400-5891. Join us on the following networks for the latest legal news:

Shirazi law firm employment law newsletter

Wife of NFL Player Suing Employer for Sexual Harassment and Discrimination

Philippa Okoye, wife of NFL player Lawrence Okoye, is suing her former boss and employer for sexually harassing her, openly mocking her interracial marriage, and demoting her when she complained. When Okaye was hired as a senior investment adviser in 2013, she was the only woman working in the Manhattan division of deVere Group, the world’s largest group of international financial advisers. 

Okaye alleges that a senior area manager for deVere was the one that primarily led the harassment. Okaye alleges that the senior manager openly expressed that he wanted the office to have the same drug and sex fueled escapades seen in The Wolf of Wall Street and The Boiler Room

Okaye, the only female employee amongst 21 male-coworkers, allegedly faced sexist antics daily. In addition to making inappropriate comments, her co-workers would also allegedly rate visiting women on whether or not they were worth “f*cking”. Some of the inappropriate things said to Okaye by her coworkers during her time of employment include:

1. Don’t change your surname if you marry Lawrence, because people will think you’re black, and that’s not good for business.

2. How many cheerleaders has your boyfriend f*cked today? He’s probably f*cked the whole cheerleading squad by now.

3. So can you handle the banter or are you going to be a woman about it and be sensitive? 

4. I think it’s disgusting when white women go out with black guys. 

When Okaye complained to the senior area manager about the sexist and racist comments directed towards her, he allegedly replied, “this is why I didn’t want women in the office.” She alleges she was then demoted and eventually fired in retaliation for her complaint. 

deVere Group claims that the allegations are “false and incredulous” and that Okaye is just a disgruntled employee. 

*image by Esteban Chiner, Flickr

Email or Call Shirazi Law Firm for a consultation: 310-400-5891. Join us on the following networks for the latest legal news:

Shirazi law firm employment law newsletter

Five Female Police Officers Suing for Sexual Harassment

Five female police officers in Bridgeton, New Jersey have filed a lawsuit against the city of Bridgeton as well as two Bridgeton police officers (twins Angel and Luis Santiago.) The women allege that Angel Santiago, a fellow officer, sexually harassed and discriminated against them for five years. 

Angel Santiago, the officer being accused of over 70 sexually explicit actions, allegedly made inappropriate comments towards the women as well as kissing them forcibly, smacking their butts, and preventing entry to the women’s bathroom without a kiss. In addition, Santiago also allegedly rubbed his clothed genitals on the women, grabbed their breasts and shared inappropriate cell phone images.

When the women filed a formal complaint, they said that Angel Santiago’s twin brother, Sgt. Luis Santiago retaliated against them. In the suit, Luis Santiago is accused of having a condescending attitude towards the women, insulting them, and making false complaints against them following their complaint. The women are also suing the city of Bridgeton for ignoring their complaint.

The lawsuit seeks back pay, lost wages and benefits, punitive damages, interest, attorney’s fees and costs, and reinstatement to the office jobs they held prior to the alleged retaliation of Luis Santiago.  Read about a similar officer sexual harassment case here.

Do you think sexual harassment is more likely to be covered up in male-dominated professions?

image by Flickr

Email or Call Shirazi Law Firm for a consultation: 310-400-5891. Join us on the following networks for the latest legal news:

Shirazi law firm employment law newsletter


Get In Touch:

What City does Shirazi Law Firm practice in?

We get a lot of spam submissions - this question helps us find your message more efficiently. You can find the answer in the address adjacent to this form.
This form does NOT create an attorney-client relationship.

Shirazi Law Firm Logo

Shirazi Law Firm, PC

Shirazi Law Firm, PC

1875 Century Park East,
Suite 1025,
Los Angeles, CA 90067

Phone: 310 400 5891
Fax: 888 908 7359