University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. Faribault Foods Inc. EE-MN-0088
Docket / Court 0:07-cv-03976 ( D. Minn. )
State/Territory Minnesota
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection IWPR/Wage Project Consent Decree Study
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
On September 14, 2007, the EEOC filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC represented a class of individuals claiming discrimination based upon race and national origin in hiring, promotion, job ... read more >
On September 14, 2007, the EEOC filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC represented a class of individuals claiming discrimination based upon race and national origin in hiring, promotion, job assignment, demotion, and discharge by Faribault Foods.

Specifically, the complaint alleged that Faribault Foods engaged in disparate treatment against its Hispanic workforce. For example, it allegedly enforced English-proficiency requirements for entry-level positions that did not require English proficiency. The EEOC sought injunctive and monetary relief.

On October 17, 2007, the District Court (Judge Richard House Kyle) approved a consent decree. The decree consolidated this case with a separate class action suit filed by the same aggrieved individuals (Mendez v. Faribault Foods, Inc.). Under the decree, Faribault Foods was generally enjoined from any future violations of Title VII or the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures. It was also required to conduct three hours of diversity training annually for its managers.

Further, the defendant was required to conduct all employee orientation and workplace policy training in Spanish, translate its safety procedures and job openings into Spanish, and provide a Spanish interpreter for all reviews and disciplinary actions. The decree also required Faribault Foods to establish a diversity committee to promote and provide feedback of its diversity efforts. It was further required to reimburse tuition for any successfully completed English-language courses by its employees. Finally, the defendant was to pay $465,000 to the class claimants. The consent decree was to remain in effect for a period of two years.

On March 28, 2008, the Court granted final approval and certification of the settlement class and the consent decree. The certified class was defined as: "Hispanic current and former employees of Faribault Foods that were discriminated against during their employment on the basis of their race and national origin."

In the March 28 order, the Court also retained jurisdiction over these matters for purposes of ensuring compliance with the consent decree. The three year enforcement period ended without any further litigation, and the case is now closed.

Adam Teitelbaum - 03/27/2010
Michael Beech - 03/09/2019

compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Content of Injunction
Comply with advertising/recruiting requirements
Discrimination Prohibition
Follow recruitment, hiring, or promotion protocols
Other requirements regarding hiring, promotion, retention
Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law
Provide antidiscrimination training
Utilize objective hiring/promotion criteria
Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff
Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)
National origin discrimination
Race discrimination
Direct Suit on Merits
Disparate Treatment
Pattern or Practice
National Origin/Ethnicity
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000e
Defendant(s) Faribault Foods Inc.
Plaintiff Description All current and former Hispanic employees who have worked at Faribault, and all Hispanic applicants who applied at Faribault at any time on or after 9/14/2001 through 10/9/2007.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations EEOC
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status outcome Granted
Filed Pro Se 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 2007 - 2010
Filed 09/14/2007
Case Closing Year 2010
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
  See this case at (May provide additional documents and, for active cases, real-time alerts)
Court Docket(s)
D. Minn.
EE-MN-0088-9000.pdf | Detail
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
D. Minn.
Complaint [ECF# 1]
EE-MN-0088-0001.pdf | Detail
D. Minn.
Consent Decree [ECF# 10]
EE-MN-0088-0002.pdf | Detail
D. Minn.
Order Approving Settlement Classes and Consent Decree [ECF# 15] (2008 WL 879999)
EE-MN-0088-0003.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
show all people docs
Judges Boylan, Arthur J. (D. Minn.) [Magistrate] show/hide docs
Kyle, Richard House (D. Minn.) show/hide docs
EE-MN-0088-0002 | EE-MN-0088-0003 | EE-MN-0088-9000
Plaintiff's Lawyers Hendrickson, John C. (Illinois) show/hide docs
EE-MN-0088-0001 | EE-MN-0088-9000
Kamp, Jean P. (Illinois) show/hide docs
EE-MN-0088-0001 | EE-MN-0088-9000
Vasichek, Laurie A. (Minnesota) show/hide docs
EE-MN-0088-0001 | EE-MN-0088-0002 | EE-MN-0088-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Goldstein, David J. (Minnesota) show/hide docs
Lovejoy, Daniel N. (Minnesota) show/hide docs
Robbins, Holly M. (Minnesota) show/hide docs
EE-MN-0088-0002 | EE-MN-0088-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -