Dots To Pay Nearly A Quarter Million To Settle EEOC Race Discrimination Suit Merrillville, Ind., Store Denied Jobs to White Applicants on a Systemic Basis, Federal Agency Charged

INDIANAPOLIS – Dots, Inc., a national women’s off-priced clothing retailer, will pay $246,500 and furnish other relief to settle a class race discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today.

According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, Dots’ Merrillville, Ind., clothing store denied jobs on a systemic basis to white applicants since at least April 1, 2007. During that time, the EEOC contended, Dots regularly hired black entry-level applicants for sales positions, but excluded white applicants who were equally or better qualified.

Race discrimination violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC filed suit after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.

The consent decree settling the suit provides that the settlement proceeds will be distributed to 32 class members. The decree also requires Dots to notify class members of open sales positions for a period of 18 months and to offer them interviews if they are still interested in employment with the company. Dots agreed to cease any further discrimination against white applicants and not to retaliate against applicants or employees who exercise their rights to complain about discrimination or assist in an investigation or discrimination-related proceeding. Dots will post a notice of non-discrimination at each of its facilities in Indiana and Illinois under its District 11 and train its managers and employees involved in the hiring process. Dots will also report on all hiring at its Merrillville location for a three-year period and will submit reports to EEOC detailing its compliance with the decree.

“We hope that this is a wake-up call for Dots and other employers who believe that they are in compliance with the law if they hire minority applicants while excluding white applicants,” said EEOC Indianapolis Regional Attorney Laurie A. Young.

According to company information, Glenwillow, Ohio-based Dots has more than 400 stores in 28 states.
The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Further information about the EEOC is available on the agency’s web site at www.eeoc.gov .

The EEOC’s Indianapolis Office is located at 101 W. Ohio Street, Suite 1900, Indianapolis, IN 46204. The EEOC’s Louisville Office is located at 600 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Place, Suite 268, Louisville, KY 40202. The EEOC’s Cincinnati Office is located at 550 Main Street, Suite 10019, Cincinnati, OH 45202, and the EEOC’s Detroit Office is located at 477 Michigan Avenue, Room 865, Detroit, MI 48226. The EEOC’s toll-free telephone number is (800) 669-4000, TTY: (317) 226-5162.

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 ...

New York Paralegal Blog

Search This Blog