This class action involving women formerly employed at Ruth's Chris Steak House was filed on October 8, 2010, in the U.S. District Court, District of Columbia. Represented by private counsel, the plaintiffs claimed that defendants engaged in a pattern and practice of discrimination against female ...
read more >
This class action involving women formerly employed at Ruth's Chris Steak House was filed on October 8, 2010, in the U.S. District Court, District of Columbia. Represented by private counsel, the plaintiffs claimed that defendants engaged in a pattern and practice of discrimination against female employees, thereby violating federal and state antidiscrimination law. The plaintiffs exhausted their administrative remedies through the EEOC and were issued Right to Sue notices prior to filing.
The complaint alleged that defendants developed a culture that is demeaning and hostile towards women and engages in a pattern and practice of discrimination against female employees. Specifically, plaintiffs allege that defendants discriminated against women and favored men with comparably less qualifications in terms of compensation and promotion; that female employees were faced with "glass ceilings" and "glass walls," in which plaintiffs were segregated into less lucrative and prestigious departments within the company; that defendants' senior management failed to monitor the company's promotion and compensation practices, which subjected plaintiffs to ongoing harm; that female employees were subjected to sexually hostile and demeaning treatment, including unwelcome sexually charged commentary and physical touching; that the company imposes harsher discipline for female employees; that female employees have been terminated from the company for conduct which when engaged in by males, does not result in termination; that defendants engaged in retaliation against plaintiffs; that defendants treated pregnant employees adversely; and that older female employees were terminated and replaced with younger female employees.
The requested relief included compensatory damages, punitive damages, and injunctive relief. Specifically, plaintiffs seek an injunction requiring the adoption of appropriate policies and programs consistent with defendants' legal obligations to operate a work environment free from sex discrimination. Plaintiffs also seek back pay, front pay, benefits, pre and post judgment interest, as well as attorneys fees and costs.
The docket shows parties engaged in extensive discovery process. After filing several sealed documents with the court on July 17, 2013, the parties stipulated to dismiss the case with prejudice. This request was granted by the court on October 9, 2013. Alice Liu - 10/10/2012
Sihang Zhang - 11/08/2016