Skip to main content

The Timken Company To Pay $120,000 To Settle EEOC Gender And Disability Discrimination Suit

GREENSBORO, N.C. – Canton, Ohio-headquartered manufacturer The Timken Company will pay $120,000 and provide other relief to settle a sex and disability discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today.

In its lawsuit (EEOC v. The Timken Company, Civil Action No. 1:10 CV 113), filed in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, the EEOC charged that in July 2007, Timken denied a full-time position to part-time employee Carmen Halloran, who worked at the company’s Randleman, N.C., facility. At the time she applied for the full-time position, Halloran had worked at the Randleman facility as a part-time process associate for four years. The EEOC alleged that the company refused to hire Halloran because one or more managers for the company believed that Halloran, who is the mother of a disabled child, would be unable to work full time and care for her disabled child. The EEOC alleged that although Timken employed men who were the fathers of disabled children, Timken failed to hire Halloran into the full-time position based on an unfounded gender stereotype that the mother of a disabled child would necessarily be the primary caregiver for the child and therefore would not be a reliable employee.

In addition to paying $120,000 in settlement of this action, Timken must take other actions set forth in the two-year consent decree resolving the case, including providing anti-discrimination training to the managers, supervisors, and employees of the company’s Randleman facility. Further, the company must post a notice at its Randleman facility concerning employees’ rights under federal anti-discrimination laws and must provide periodic reports to the EEOC on its hiring practices.

“The EEOC is committed to fighting discrimination in the workplace,” said Lynette A. Barnes, regional attorney for the EEOC's Charlotte District Office. “Employers must be careful not to apply stereotypes against women based on perceptions that they must always be the primary caregivers and therefore are unreliable employees.”

Timken manufactures precision ball bearings and other friction management and power transmission products. The company employs more than 25,000 employees world-wide.

The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting discrimination in employment. Further information about the Commission 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 ...