The Memphis District Office and Nashville Area Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought this lawsuit against Whirlpool Corporation on June 9, 2006, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. Judge John T. Nixon was assigned to this case. The complaint alleged sexual and racial harassment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC sought injunctive and monetary relief for the individual complainant and attorneys fees for the EEOC.

Specifically, the complaint was brought after an African-American employee of Whirlpool complained that a fellow employee had racially and sexually harassed her. The harassment eventually led to the harasser physically attacking the complainant. Prior to the attack, the complainant complained to her supervisors about the harasser’s racialized and sexualized comments toward her, but her supervisors did very little to address her concerns. At one point, she complained to the supervisor and he responded by saying: “why don’t you just go ahead and f#@k him and get it over with?” After constantly rejecting the harasser’s sexual advances, the harasser physically attacked the complainant. The complainant eventually quit her job with Whirlpool Corporation because her therapist and psychologist advised her to do so. The complainant intervened in the case on July 24, 2006.

For the next two years, the parties engaged in discovery.

On December 21, 2009, the court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. The court awarded monetary relief in back pay, front pay, and compensatory damages in the amount of $1,073,261. The court did not award any punitive damages. The court also did not grant any injunctive relief, stating that "because the workplace at issue, Defendant’s LaVergne Division, closed as of August 15, 2008 and Plaintiffs did not renew their request for this relief in their post-trial papers, the Court will not now grant injunctive or declaratory relief."

On February 20, 2010, the plaintiffs moved for attorney fees and costs. The court granted the plaintiff $215,015 in attorneys fees and costs on August 2, 2011.

Meanwhile, on April 26, 2011, the defendant appealed the district court's December ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Without stating a reason, the parties then jointly moved to dismiss the appeal. The Sixth Circuit granted this joint motion on June 12, 2012, and the case is now closed.

Kevin Wilemon - 08/09/2008
Sean Whetstone - 06/04/2018


compress summary