University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. DIAL CORPORATION EE-IL-0075
Docket / Court 1:99-cv-03356 ( N.D. Ill. )
State/Territory Illinois
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection EEOC Study -- in sample
IWPR/Wage Project Consent Decree Study
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
The Chicago District Office of the EEOC brought this suit against the Dial Corporation, who makes soap and other hygiene products, in May 1999, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The suit was based on sexual harassment and retaliation claims in violation of Title VII ... read more >
The Chicago District Office of the EEOC brought this suit against the Dial Corporation, who makes soap and other hygiene products, in May 1999, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The suit was based on sexual harassment and retaliation claims in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The docket indicates that the parties had numerous discovery motions, mostly protective orders and orders to compel, and two individuals intervened. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, which was granted in part and denied in part. The defendant filed an interlocutory appeal of that ruling, which was dismissed by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

The terms of the consent decree included both injunctive and monetary relief. Dial had to pay $10,000,000 into a settlement fund that was to be dispersed to eligible class members. Because the suit was based on a general hostile work environment at the Montgomery, Illinois facility, the class was open to any female working at the facility before the suit was started, who provides evidence they were harassed. If they are admitted by the EEOC to the class then they are eligible to receive a portion of the settlement fund, up to a $300,000 maximum for any member of the class. The amount given to each member of the class is to be determined by the EEOC and the Court before the payments are made. Dial was ordered not to retaliate against any person who complains of harassment and they are not allowed to harass or discriminate based on gender. In addition they must rework their harassment policy and complaint procedures. There will be three decree monitors who will provide assistance to Dial during this time and help ensure that they follow the required aspects of the decree. All current employees and managers at the Montgomery facility must undergo EEO training, and all future employees must undergo it as well. The decree included a dispute resolution policy to help avoid future court action; however, either party may seek court enforcement if the dispute resolution fails.

Kevin Wilemon - 06/11/2007


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Female
Content of Injunction
Auditing
Develop anti-discrimination policy
Discrimination Prohibition
Implement complaint/dispute resolution process
Monitor/Master
Monitoring
Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law
Provide antidiscrimination training
Reporting
Retaliation Prohibition
Discrimination-area
Harassment / Hostile Work Environment
Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)
Discrimination-basis
Sex discrimination
EEOC-centric
Direct Suit on Merits
Private Party intervened in EEOC suit
General
Disparate Treatment
Pattern or Practice
Retaliation
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000e
Defendant(s) Dial Corporation
Plaintiff Description Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf of one or more workers.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations EEOC
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Damages
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration 2003 - 2005
Case Closing Year 2003
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies Ending Sex and Race Discrimination in the Workplace: Legal Interventions That Push the Envelope
Institute for Women's Policy Research
Written: Mar. 01, 2011
By: Ariane Hegewisch, Cynthia Deitch, Evelyn Murphy (Institute for Women's Policy Research & The Wage Project)
Citation: (Institute for Women's Policy Research, March 2011)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Megacases, Diversity, and the Elusive Goal of Workplace Reform
Written: Mar. 01, 2008
By: Nancy Levit (University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law)
Citation: 49 B.C. L. Rev. 367 (2008)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Second Generation Employment Discrimination: A Structural Approach
By: Susan Sturm (Columbia Law School)
Citation: 101 Colum. L. Rev. 458 (2001)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
1:99-cv-03356 (N.D. Ill.) 10/27/2005
EE-IL-0075-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint 05/21/1999
EE-IL-0075-0014.pdf | Detail
Document Source: District Court
Memorandum and Order [Motion to Reopen Discovery] 04/28/2000 (N.D. Ill.)
EE-IL-0075-0001.pdf | Detail
Memorandum and Order [On EEOC's Motion to Reconsider] 05/16/2000 (2000 WL 684195) (N.D. Ill.)
EE-IL-0075-0017.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: Westlaw
Memorandum and Order [Motion to Compel] 06/28/2000 (N.D. Ill.)
EE-IL-0075-0003.pdf | Detail
Memorandum and Order [Motions for Protective Orders] 11/28/2000 (N.D. Ill.)
EE-IL-0075-0004.pdf | Detail
Memorandum and Order [Motion for Summary Judgment] 08/14/2001 (156 F.Supp.2d 926) (N.D. Ill.)
EE-IL-0075-0016.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Westlaw
Federal Judge Rules EEOC Suit Against Dial Soap Can Proceed As Class "Pattern or Practice" Case 08/16/2001
EE-IL-0075-0013.pdf | Detail
Document Source: EEOC.gov
Memorandum and Order [Motion to Exclude Evidence] 09/17/2002 (N.D. Ill.)
EE-IL-0075-0005.pdf | Detail
EEOC Press Release [Single Jury Trial Decision] 02/13/2003
EE-IL-0075-0007.pdf | Detail
Memorandum and Order on Defendant's Motion for Clarification of the Court's Order of a Bifurcated Trial 02/14/2003 (N.D. Ill.)
EE-IL-0075-0018.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
EEOC Press Release [Jury Trial Decision Upheld] 04/24/2003
EE-IL-0075-0008.pdf | Detail
Consent Decree 04/29/2003
EE-IL-0075-0006.pdf | Detail
EEOC Press Release [Consent Decree] 04/29/2003
EE-IL-0075-0009.pdf | Detail
One-Year Report of the Consent Decree Monitors to the Parties and the Court 05/24/2004
EE-IL-0075-0011.pdf | Detail
EEOC Press Release [Monitors' Report] 05/26/2004
EE-IL-0075-0010.pdf | Detail
Second Year Report of the Consent Decree Monitors 05/24/2005
EE-IL-0075-0015.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Final Report of the Consent Decree Monitors to the Parties and the Court 10/26/2005
EE-IL-0075-0012.pdf | Detail
Judges Urbom, Warren Keith (D. Neb.)
EE-IL-0075-0016 | EE-IL-0075-0017 | EE-IL-0075-0018
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers None on record
Defendant's Lawyers None on record
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -