Skip to main content

LUBY’S TO PAY $135,000 FOR SEXUAL HARASSMENT

EEOC Settles Suit Against San Antonio Restaurant on Behalf of Female Victims, Including Teen, Subjected to Sexual Touching, Comments, Gestures, and Requests for Sexual Favors


SAN ANTONIO – The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today announced the settlement of a sex discrimination lawsuit against Luby’s Restaurants Limited Partnership, doing business as Luby’s San Antonio #19 (Luby’s), for $135,000 and significant remedial relief on behalf of a class of female workers who were subjected to a pervasive sexually hostile work environment for years. Houston-based Luby’s operates 128 restaurants in five states with several locations in San Antonio and throughout Texas.

The EEOC’s suit (Civil Action No. SA-08-CA-0794-FB), filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, San Antonio Division, charged Luby’s with subjecting female employees, including a teenager, to a sexually hostile work environment at its Floyd Curl Ave., San Antonio location. Specifically, the EEOC said that the women were subjected to, among other things, repeated unwelcome sexual touching, numerous sexual comments, as well as gestures and innuendo.

The harassment, which was allowed to continue for at least four years, also included a work atmosphere permeated with lewd and sexually offensive behavior, including restraining one woman in the women’s restroom while requesting sexual favors from her. Additionally, one of the female employees was forced to quit her job because Luby’s failed to take appropriate action to address the harassment.

In addition to providing $135,000 in monetary damages to the women, the consent decree resolving the case enjoins Luby’s from discriminating against employees based on sex and requires the following:

Implementing an effective anti-discrimination policy;
Conducting sexual harassment prevention training for all Luby’s employees, including managers and supervisors;
Posting of a Notice of Luby’s intent to comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act; and
Providing a Notice of Rights to all employees 18-years-old and younger, which explains their rights to work in an environment free from any form of harassment or discrimination.
“Employees have a legal right to work in an environment that is free of sexual harassment,” said EEOC Senior Trial Attorney Eduardo Juarez of the agency’s San Antonio Field Office. “Upon notification of a complaint of sexual harassment, employers must do whatever is needed to correct the behavior of the offending employee and prevent further harassment.”

Sexual harassment violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which also prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, gender, or national origin, and protects employees who complain about such offenses from retaliation.

EEOC Supervisory Trial Attorney Judith G. Taylor added, “Sexual harassment affects far too many workers in the service industries, but especially teenagers who feel they have no recourse and are especially vulnerable because of their age and inexperience. Every employer has a duty to protect its workforce from harassment.”

The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Further information about the EEOC is available on its web site at www.eeoc.gov.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

Mortgage Fraud

Manhattan District Attorney Robert M. Morgenthau announced today the indictment of 13 individuals and a mortgage origination company for perpetrating over $100 million in mortgage fraud over a four-year period in the New York City metropolitan area. In addition, 12 individuals have already waived indictment and pleaded guilty to felonies relating to their participation in the mortgage fraud scheme. The indictment charges 13 individuals and the mortgage company, AFG FINANCIAL GROUP, INC., with enterprise corruption, grand larceny, scheme to defraud and conspiracy involving 19 fraudulent mortgage transactions. The defendants include the principals and a number of employees of the mortgage company, as well as bank employees, appraisers, and three attorneys. Two other attorneys are among the defendants who already pleaded guilty. The crimes charged in the indictment occurred between June 2004 and April 2009 with the bulk of the fraudulent closings occurring from mid-2005 through the end of...

DISTRICT ATTORNEY VANCE ANNOUNCES INDICTMENT OF SIX SUBCONTRACTING COMPANIES AND THEIR OWNERS IN MULTIMILLION-DOLLAR FRAUD

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., today announced the indictments of six subcontracting companies and their owners for colluding with LEHR CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION (LEHR) in a multimillion dollar scheme that defrauded numerous construction clients over the past decade. See, related story. The announcement comes one day after DA Vance announced LEHR and four executives were indicted on crimes including Enterprise Corruption, the New York State Racketeering law. GODSELL CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION and its owner ARTHUR GODSELL are charged with Grand Larceny in the Second Degree. JT ROSELLE LIGHTING, INC. and its owner JAMES ROSELLE, LIBERTY CONTRACTING CORPORATION and its owners GEORGE FOTIADIS and KEVIN FOTIADIS, PJ MECHANICAL and its owner JAMES PAPPAS, SUPERIOR ACOUSTICS, INC. and its owner KENNETH MCGUIGAN, and SWEENEY & HARKIN CARPENTRY and its owner MICHAEL HAYES are charged with Grand Larceny in the Third Degree.[1] "The defendants in this case cheated clie...