Skip to main content

KobeWieland Copper Sued for Disability Discrimination

WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. – The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today announced it has filed a disability discrimination lawsuit against KobeWieland Copper Products, LLC (KobeWieland) for failing to hire an individual because of his perceived disability at its facility in Pine Hall, North Carolina. KobeWieland manufactures and sells copper tubing, and employs over 500 associates between its two plants in Pine Hall, NC and Wheeling, IL.

According to the EEOC’s complaint, KobeWieland failed to hire Joseph Cardwell for a full-time caster position because it regarded him as being disabled. Due to a childhood accident, Cardwell lost fingers on his left hand. Cardwell was offered a position by KobeWieland on September 24, 2008. However, when Cardwell reported for his first day of work, KobeWieland’s Human Resource Specialist noticed that Cardwell was missing fingers, and rescinded the offer of employment. The Human Resources Specialist stated that he was concerned that Cardwell could not do the job because of his missing fingers.

The complaint further alleges that Cardwell explained that he could do the job and even offered to demonstrate how he could do it, but was not allowed to do so. The EEOC alleges that Cardwell was fully qualified for the position and could perform the job, but was denied the job because KobeWieland regarded him as disabled because of his missing fingers.

Such alleged conduct violates the American with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). The EEOC filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, Winston-Salem Division (EEOC v. KobeWieland Copper Products, LLC, Civil Action No. 1:10-cv-636), after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement. In its suit, the EEOC seeks back pay, compensatory damages and punitive damages, and rightful-place hiring, for Cardwell, as well as injunctive and other non-monetary relief.

“It’s unfortunate that twenty years after the enactment of the American with Disabilities Act, some employers still react to applicants and employees based on myths, fears and stereotypes about a certain impairment that the individual may have," said EEOC Regional Attorney Lynette A. Barnes of the agency’s Charlotte District Office. "In this lawsuit, the EEOC alleges that rather than allowing Mr. Cardwell the opportunity to show that he could do the job, the company simply revoked Mr. Cardwell's job offer because of his missing fingers."

The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting discrimination. More information about the EEOC is available on its website 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 ...