On September 30, 2005, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed suit against Mantech MSM Security Services, Inc., on behalf of a black employee who was offered a settlement that purported to waive his rights to file charges with the EEOC and to participate in its investigations. It ...
read more >
On September 30, 2005, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed suit against Mantech MSM Security Services, Inc., on behalf of a black employee who was offered a settlement that purported to waive his rights to file charges with the EEOC and to participate in its investigations. It is also unclear whether the agreement was specific to the employee or a standard agreement offered to all Mantech employees. It is likewise unclear whether the employee had or knew of any discrimination claims against Mantech at the time he was offered the settlement and release agreement. The EEOC alleged that the agreement constituted per se retaliation and violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.). The EEOC sought monetary relief and injuctive relief barring Mantech from using such waiver agreements.
The parties reached a settlement agreement, which the Court (Judge Alexander Williams Jr.) approved and entered on September 21, 2006. The one-year agreement required Mantech to modify all releases of employment discrimination claims to inform signers that the agreement neither prevents them from filing charges with the EEOC, participating in investigations, or benefiting from injunctive relief obtained by the EEOC nor requires them to inform the company of communication with the EEOC. The decree also empowered the EEOC to monitor Mantech's practices by requiring Mantech to provide copies of claim releases it would have employees sign. Under the terms of the decree Mantech also had to pay the employee the amount of money offered in the original release agreement with interest ($7557 total). The case is now closed.
The decree was entered in 2006 and scheduled to last 2007. No further docket entries exist, so the case is closed.
Kenneth Gray - 07/16/2013
- 12/21/2018
compress summary