Skip to main content

EEOC Obtains $110,000 in Settlement of Sexual Harassment Case with Las Vegas Car Dealership

Women Were Sexually Harassed and Retaliated Against for Complaining, Agency Charged

LAS VEGAS – Bill Heard Chevrolet Corp. of Las Vegas will pay $110,000 and furnish other relief to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today.

The EEOC had charged in its suit (EEOC v. Bill Heard Chevrolet Corp.-Las Vegas, et al, Case No. CV-07-01195-RLH-PAL) that management and coworkers at the car dealership openly grabbed at a woman employee’s breasts, made crude remarks about women’s bodies, persistently solicited them for dates and/or sexual favors and sexually assaulted at least one female employee. The EEOC further charged that some women were repeatedly told that women should not be in the car business. When the women tried to complain about the daily verbal harassment, the agency asserted, they suffered retaliation in the form of discipline, demotions and/or terminations.

Sexual harassment, sex discrimination and retaliation for complaining about it violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC filed suit after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement.

Pursuant to the settlement, $110,000 was provided for nine claimants. Further, the company agreed to refrain from any further discriminatory practices, including retaliation against any employee for complaining about them.

“The women in this case sought to earn a living selling cars and rightfully expected to do so while being treated with dignity and respect,” said Anna Park, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Los Angeles District Office, which covers Southern Nevada. “They should not have had to endure being sexually objectified by their co-workers and management. The EEOC will take all steps necessary to ensure that employees are respected and free from sexual harassment, discrimination and retaliation.”

Before it began bankruptcy proceedings in September 2008, Bill Heard Chevrolet Corp. had a facility on Decatur Boulevard in Las Vegas and more than 3,500 employees nationwide.

The EEOC is responsible for enforcing the nation’s 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.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...