Skip to main content

Judge Approves Guam Aircraft Company’s Settlement of EEOC Religious Discrimination Suit

HAGATNA, Guam – A federal judge has approved the settlement by Aviation Concepts, Inc., an aircraft retailer and service provider in Guam, of a religious discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced today. Aviation Concepts will pay $51,000 and furnish extensive relief to settle the EEOC’s suit. The federal agency originally filed suit against Aviation Concepts in September 2011, charging that the company fired Armando Perez, an assistant mechanic and practicing Jehovah’s Witness, after he informed his supervisor that he did not wish to perform certain acts that conflicted with his religious beliefs (EEOC v. Aviation Concepts, Inc., Case No. 11-00028). Specifically, the EEOC alleged that a manager ordered Perez to raise the U.S. and Guam flags at the worksite in June 2010. Although he explained that raising the flags would violate his religious beliefs, the manager ordered Perez to go home and fired him that same day for insubordination. Religious 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. Aviation Concepts and the EEOC ultimately entered into a two-and-a-half year consent decree, effectively settling the lawsuit. Aside from the monetary relief for Perez, the company agreed to appoint an equal employment opportunity consultant; revise its policies and procedures to include the reasonable accommodation of sincerely held beliefs; effectively handle requests for religious accommodation and complaints of discrimination or retaliation; and provide annual anti-discrimination training to all employees with additional training for management and human resources officials on how to handle complaints and accommodation requests. Aviation Concepts will also post a notice on the matter at each of its facilities, and the EEOC will monitor compliance with the decree. “Workers have the right to request an accommodation or exception to work tasks or practices that conflict with their religious beliefs,” said Anna Y. Park, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Los Angeles District Office. “We are hopeful that the terms Aviation Concepts has agreed to will promote a workplace culture that is inclusive of workers irrespective of religion.” Timothy Riera, local director for the EEOC’s Honolulu Local Office, which has jurisdiction over Guam, added, “Employers cannot ignore or summarily dismiss religious accommodation requests by workers. Companies who fire, discipline or otherwise negatively impact workers who exercise this right violate federal law.” According to the company’s website, Aviation Concepts provides private jet charter, aircraft sales and acquisition, business aviation consulting and aircraft management services from its 50,000-square-foot hangar facility in Guam. 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.

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 ...