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