eeoc-initiated litigation: case law developments in 2012 and
TRANSCRIPT
EEOC-Initiated Litigation:
Case Law Developments In
2012 And Trends To Watch
For In 2013
14250109v2
March 12, 2013
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 2 |
Today’s Discussion Leaders
Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. Christopher DeGroff
Seyfarth Shaw LLP Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Christopher DeGroff of Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 3 |
Today’s Discussion Points
What Is Hot In The EEOC Enforcement Litigation World?
Key Trends And Developments In 2012 & And What To
Look For In 2013
The EEOC’s New Strategic Enforcement Plan
Noteworthy Settlements And Verdicts In 2012 & 2013
And What They Signal For Employers
Significant Court Rulings In 2012 & Early 2013 And What
They Mean For Employers
What Should Be In Your Tool Kit?
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 4 |
Short Review Of The EEOC’s Systemic
Initiative And Impact On Employers
What Is The Systemic Initiative And What Does It Mean?
• Developed in 2005-2006, But Gaining Momentum In Last 3 Years
• Concerted Move Toward Initiating More Systemic Cases
• Based On The Notion That “Where There Is Smoke (One EEOC
Charge), There Is Likely To Be Fire” (Discrimination Against A
Group Of Employees)
• Employers Will Face More “Class-Like” Cases, Which Are Not
Governed By Rule 23 But Present Similar Exposures
Setting The Stage:
A Leaner, Stronger, Faster EEOC
• Emerging Face Of The EEOC
• Initiatives:
• “National Law Firm Model”
• EEOC Trial Team Program
• EEOC Appellate Program
• Pay Equity Audit Program
• Better Deployment Of Resources
• Augmented Technical Abilities
• Stronger Bench Of Experts
• Emphasis On Quality Over Quantity In
FY2013
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 5 |
Setting The Stage:
EEOC Federal Court Filings
FY 2012 Legal Theories
• 122 Merits Lawsuits
• 86 Individual Suits
• 26 Multiple-Victim Suits
• 10 Systemic Suits
• New Filings Breakdown
• 66 Contained Title VII
Claims
• 45 Contained ADA
Claims
• 12 Contained ADEA
Claims
• 2 Contained Equal Pay
Act Claims
• 33 Subpoena Enforcement
And Other Actions
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 6 |
Setting The Stage: Systemic Cases On
EEOC’s Active Docket
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 7 |
Setting The Stage:
EEOC’s Shifted Focus
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 8 |
Types Of Cases Filed By EEOC FY2012
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 9 |
Significant Settlements In 2012
$11 Million - EEOC v. Yellow Transportation, Inc. and
YRC, Inc., No. 09-CV-7693 (N.D. Ill. June 28, 2012)
$4.5 Million - EEOC v. Interstate Distributor Co., No. 12-
CV-02591 (D. Col. Nov. 8, 2012)
$3.13 Million – EEOC v. Pepsi Beverages, No. 09-CV-
4594 (N.D. Ca. Jan 11, 2012)
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 10 |
Setting The Stage:
EEOC National Strategic Priorities
The SEP lists six national enforcement priorities,
including:
1. Eliminating barriers in recruitment and hiring
2. Protecting immigrant, migrant, and other
vulnerable workers
3. Addressing emerging and developing issues
4. Enforcing equal pay laws
5. Preserving access to the legal system
6. Preventing harassment through systemic
enforcement and targeted outreach
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 11 |
“The Big 6”:
Hiring Cases
Hiring Cases – EEOC Views Itself As Uniquely
Positioned To Litigate These Cases
• EEOC v. Kaplan Higher Education Corp. et al., No.
10-CV-2882, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11722 (N.D. Ohio
Jan. 28, 2013)
• EEOC v. Pepsi Beverages, No. 09-CV-4594 (N.D. Ca.
Jan 11, 2012)
• EEOC v. Freeman Companies, No. 09-CV-2573 (D.
Md. 2009)
• EEOC v. PeopleMark, Case No. 08-CV-907 (W.D.
Mich. 2008)
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 12 |
“The Big 6”:
Significant Harassment Cases
Significant Harassment Rulings:
• EEOC and Sherry L. Brown v. Merrill Pine Ridge
LLC, et al., No. 11-CV-589 (W.D. Wi. Jan. 17, 2013)
• EEOC v. South Loop Club, No. 12-CV-7677 (N.D. Ill.
Feb. 6, 2013)
• EEOC v. McPherson Companies, Inc., No. 10-CV-
2627 (N.D. Ala. Nov. 14, 2012)
• EEOC v. Holmes & Holmes Industrial Inc., 2012 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 146707 (D. Utah Oct. 10, 2012)
• EEOC v. Prospect Airport Services, Inc., U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 103256 (D. Nev. July 25, 2012)
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 13 |
“The Big 6”:
Protecting Vulnerable Workers
• The EEOC identified approximately 90 significant partnerships
in the “vulnerable worker” area, with goals to increase such
partnerships by 10% in both FY 2012 and FY 2014.
• Example: the EEOC has aggressively pursued new and
existing cases in the agriculture industry, noting publically in
one such case:
“Unfortunately, we continue to see cases involving employees who
suffer sexual exploitation at the hands of their bosses. . . . All
workers are entitled to a workplace that is free of harassment and
discrimination, and employers should think twice before assuming
that vulnerable workers will not exercise their rights due to fear or
the lack of understanding”
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 14 |
“The Big 6”:
Pay Discrimination Now Has a Seat at
the EEOC’s Table
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 15 |
January 2012
EEOC Issues Draft SEP
NO PAY OBJECTIVE
June 2012 Public
Comment on SEP
NO PAY OBJECTIVE
July 2012 EEOC Hosts
Full Day Public
Meeting
NO PAY OBJECTIVE
September 2012
EEOC Issues “Revamped” Draft of SEP
NO PAY OBJECTIVE
December 2012
EEOC Approves Final SEP
PAY OBJECTIVE
FIRST TIME PAY EQUITY LISTED AS PRIORITY
“The Big 6”:
Preserving Access To The Legal System
1. Releases That Waive The Right To File Charge
2. Last Chance Agreements
3. Traditional Concepts Of Retaliation
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 16 |
“The Big 6”:
Preserving Access To The Legal System
• Retaliation is the #1 source of all EEOC charges
• In the last 3 months, EEOC has settled 6 large
retaliation cases
• $77,500 – EEOC v. Kintetsu Int’l Express, No. 10-CV-00560 (D.
Haw. Jan. 29, 2013)
• $85,000 – EEOC v. Cappo Mgt., No. 12-CV00239 (M.D. Tenn
Jan. 25, 2013)
• $100,000 – EEOC v. South Loop Club, No. 12-CV-7677 (N.D.
Ill. Feb. 6, 2013)
• $130,000 – EEOC v. D.O.E. Technologies , No. 11-CV-000861
(D. De. Jan 24, 2013)
• $500,000 – EEOC v. Cognis Corp. (Ill.), No. 10-CV-2182 (C.D.
Ill. Jan. 25, 2013)
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 17 |
“The Big 6”:
Emerging Issues
Novel Litigation Theories – Attempts To Push Non-
Traditional Claims
• Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (“LGBT”)
• Domestic / Dating Violence
• Human Trafficking
• Lactation
• Local / Regional Initiatives
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 18 |
Non-SEP Focus:
Continued Emphasis On ADA Cases
Key Settlements
• EEOC v. Interstate Distributor Co., Case No. 12-CV-
02591 (D. Col. Nov. 8, 2012)
• EEOC v. Hill Country Farms, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 147403 (S.D. Iowa Sept. 18, 2012)
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 19 |
Non-SEP Focus:
Continued Emphasis On ADA Cases
Ground Zero For ADA: Accommodations
• EEOC v. United States Steel Corp. No. 10-CV-1283
(W.D. Pa. Feb. 20, 2013)
• EEOC v. The Picture People, Inc., 684 F.3d 981 (10th
Cir. 2012)
• EEOC v. Tricore Reference Laboratories, 2012 U.S.
App. LEXIS 17200 (10th Cir. Aug. 16, 2012)
• EEOC v. OSI Restaurant Partners, LLC, 2012 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 31354 (D. Ariz. Mar. 5, 2012)
• EEOC v. Ford Motor Co., U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12800
(E.D. Mich. Sept. 10, 2012)
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 20 |
Non-SEP Focus:
Continued Emphasis On ADEA Cases
• EEOC v. Baltimore County, et al., No. 07-CV-2500 (D.
Md. Oct. 16, 2012)
• EEOC v. Exxon Mobil Corp., No. 06-CV-1732 (N.D.
Tex. Sept. 13, 2012)
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 21 |
Procedural Rulings:
The Application Of § 706’s Limitations
Period • EEOC v. Bass Pro Outdoor World, LLC, 2012 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 75597 (S.D. Tex. May 31, 2012)
• EEOC v. United States Steel Corporation, et al., 2012
U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101872 (W.D. Pa. July 23, 2012)
• EEOC v. Global Horizons, Inc., et al., 2012 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 105993 (E.D. Wash. July 27, 2012)
• EEOC v. Princeton Healthcare Systems, 2012 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 150267 (D. N.J. Oct. 18, 2012)
• EEOC v. Global Horizons, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
160729 (D. Haw. Nov. 8, 2012)
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 22 |
Procedural Rulings:
Failure To Conciliate
• EEOC v. Ruby Tuesday, Inc., No. 09-CV-01330, 2013
U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8268 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 22, 2013)
• EEOC v. The Original Honeybaked Ham, No. 11-CV-
02560 (D. Col. Jan. 15, 2013)
• EEOC v. American Somoa Government, et al., No.
11-CV-00525 (D. Haw. Oct. 5, 2012)
• EEOC v. Evans Fruit Co., Inc., No. 10-CV-03033,
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72836 (E.D. Wash. May 24,
2012)
• EEOC v. United Road Towing, Inc., No. 10-CV-06259
(N.D. Ill. May 11, 2012)
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 23 |
A Word On EEOC Subpoenas
• Record Number Of Subpoena Enforcement Actions
• The EEOC Is Using Its Subpoena Power As An Early
Discovery Tool
• Pursuing More Aggressively Than Ever Before –
Likely Impact Of EEOC v. CRST Van Expedited, Inc.
• Fact Of Life: There Is A Very Short Time Frame To
Challenge An EEOC Subpoena (5 Days)
• Negotiation Methods To Fracture EEOC
Enforcement Actions Or Position The Employer’s
Defense
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 24 |
Scope Of Investigation And Subpoena
Enforcement
Key Subpoena Rulings In 2012
• EEOC v. Farmer’s Pride, Inc., No. 12-MC-148 (E.D.
Pa. Oct. 31, 2012)
• EEOC v. Kronos, Inc., No. 09-MC-00079 (3d Cir. Sept.
14, 2012)
• EEOC v. Nestle Prepared Foods, 2012 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 71864 (E.D. Ky. May 23, 2012)
• EEOC v. McLane Company, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 164920 (D. Ariz. No. 19, 2012)
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 25 |
Money And Power:
How EEOC’s Political Environment
MayAffect Your Bottom Line
• One critical metric must be considered when trying
to forecast how the EEOC will behave in 2013: the
Commission’s budget.
• Ultimately, the EEOC’s agenda will always be a
reflection of its monetary resources. In late 2011,
Congressional action reduced the Commission’s
annual budget by $6.6 million.
• Commissioner Constance Barker recently
expressed concerns regarding the EEOC’s
allocation of resources at the February 20, 2013
public meeting.
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 26 |
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 27 |
Successful Defense Approaches And
Strategies To Systemic Investigations
More Comprehensive Litigation Hold Notices
Phased Or Stages Responses (To Diminish “Curb Appeal”)
Creation Of Firewalls Around Geographic Areas / Time
Periods
Creating “Reasonableness” & Laying The Groundwork For
A Subpoena Opposition
Selective Strategies In “Calling The EEOC’s Bluff”
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 28 |
General Defense Pointers
Summary Judgment Is Exceptionally Difficult To Obtain,
Slicing And Confining The “Class” – By The Class Period,
Geographic Regions, Etc. – Is The Goal
Experts Are Crucial To Success In Systemic Cases
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 29 |
Negotiating And Settling Litigation With
The EEOC
• Remember Who You Are Dealing With
• Key Differences From Negotiating Settlements With The
Private Plaintiffs’ Bar
• Public Interest Factor
• Media Issues
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 30 |
Consent Decree Essentials
“Ice In Winter” Strategy
Common Features: Training; Revised Policies;
Monitoring (Internal Or External); Record-
Keeping; Posting Of Notice
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 31 |
What Should Be In Your Tool Kit?
Robust E-Discovery And Data Management Capabilities
Rigorous Monitoring Of Key Employee Data (Hiring, Pay,
And Promotions)
Ongoing Review And Assessment Of Workplace Due
Process Practices
Capability To Track Charge Activity
State-Of-The-Art Leave of Absence And Anti-Retaliation
Policies
Seyfarth Shaw LLP©2012 Seyfarth Shaw LLP 32 |
Questions