On June 29, 2006, the Los Angeles office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit under Title VII against Sierra Aluminum in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The EEOC alleged that the defendants had violated the complainant's rights by ...
read more >
On June 29, 2006, the Los Angeles office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit under Title VII against Sierra Aluminum in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The EEOC alleged that the defendants had violated the complainant's rights by subjecting her to harassment. We have no further information on the specific allegations made, since we have only the docket and the consent decree in this case.
On August 2, 2007, the parties settled the case. Fifteen days later, the court approved their consent decree and closed the case. Under the terms of the consent decree, the defendants agreed to pay $200,000 to resolve the complaint. The defendants were prohibited from discriminating or retaliating against any employees violation of Title VII, and they were required to develop an anti-discrimination policy to post at the place of business and distribute to all employees. The defendants were required to include compliance with EEO policies as a measure of performance in each employee's annual performance review. The defendants agreed to retain an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission consultant to ensure that they comply with the terms of the decree. Defendants were required to provide a mandatory intensive three-hour EEO training program for all management and human resources personnel each year. All other employees were to be required to attend a similar program for one hour each year. The defendants agreed to form a complaint process that provides employees with accessible and confidential avenues of complaint. This process was to allow the employees to report their complaints to someone outside their chain of management, provide confidentiality for all complaints, involve timely investigation of all complaints, and allow for remedial action to be taken.
The EEOC was allowed to send a representative to observe the EEO training that would be provided to all of the defendant's employees. Within 90 days, the defendants were to provide a copy of all policies and procedures formulated as a result of the consent decree, as well as certification of the mandatory training that they were to require of all employees. In addition, the defendants were to also provide semiannual reports of all complaints and the results of the ensuing investigations. The defendants were required to maintain a record-keeping procedure that provided for centralized tracking of all complaints and the monitoring of such complaints to prevent discrimination. This included all documents generated as a result of a complaint of harassment.Kristen Sagar - 04/28/2008