University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. MACNAB MANUFACTURING INC. EE-WA-0050
Docket / Court 2:99-cv-00733 ( W.D. Wash. )
State/Territory Washington
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection IWPR/Wage Project Consent Decree Study
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
The EEOC's Seattle office filed this suit on May 10, 1999 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The EEOC alleged that defendant Macnab Manufacturing, Inc., violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by discriminating on the basis of sex and retaliation against two ... read more >
The EEOC's Seattle office filed this suit on May 10, 1999 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The EEOC alleged that defendant Macnab Manufacturing, Inc., violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by discriminating on the basis of sex and retaliation against two female complainants. The complainants were allowed limited intervention in the case.

The court entered a consent decree on August 3, 2000. The defendant were required to pay $330,000, which was to be appropriately dispersed by the complainant's counsel to the appropriate parties. The defendant was also required to obtain a "sexual harassment consultant" who would help the defendant in drafting antidiscrimination policies and creating an effective complaint procedure for sexual harassment. Defendant was also ordered to implement a training program for its employees to prevent sexual harassment and was ordered to implement policies promoting supervisor accountability for sexual harassment. Finally, the defendants were required to prepare and submit reports to the EEOC for five years so that the EEOC could monitor their progress.

It has been more than five years since the implementation of the consent decree, and there has been no subsequent action on the docket. It is most likely that the case is closed.

The EEOC's Birmingham office filed this suit on March 31, 1998 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Northwestern Division. The EEOC alleged that defendant Estes Oil Company, Inc., violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by discriminating against a class of female employees. Soon after filing, one complainant intervened in the suit. The second complainant later intervened, but the defendant alleged that a settlement had already been reached with that complainant. The court granted the motion to intervene but also granted the defendant's motion to enforce the previously reached settlement agreement. The second complainant settled for $12,000 according to the findings and recommendation resulting from the hearing to enforce the settlement agreement. No other available documents revealed the extent of the defendant's settlement. By February of 2000, all claims were resolved.

Megan Brown - 01/12/2018


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Female
Content of Injunction
Auditing
Develop anti-discrimination policy
Discrimination Prohibition
Expungement of Employment Record
Implement complaint/dispute resolution process
Monitoring
Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law
Provide antidiscrimination training
Recordkeeping
Reporting
Retaliation Prohibition
Discrimination-area
Harassment / Hostile Work Environment
Discrimination-basis
Sex discrimination
EEOC-centric
Private Party intervened in EEOC suit
General
Disparate Treatment
Retaliation
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000e
Defendant(s) Macnab Manufacturing Inc
Plaintiff Description Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf of one or more workers.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations EEOC
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted 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 2000 - 2005
Case Closing Year 2000
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
  Microsoft Gender Discrimination Class Action Lawsuit
Date: Oct. 14, 2016
By: Outten & Golden
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Age Discrimination Class Action seeks Fair Employment for Older PwC Applicants
http://www.pwcagecase.com/
Date: Apr. 27, 2016
By: Outten & Golden
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Smith Barney Gender Discrimination
https://www.lieffcabraser.com/employment/smith-barney/
Date: August 2008
By: Outten & Golden
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Megacases, Diversity, and the Elusive Goal of Workplace Reform
Date: Mar. 1, 2008
By: Nancy Levit (University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law Faculty)
Citation: 49 B.C. L. Rev. 367 (2008)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Second Generation Employment Discrimination: A Structural Approach
Date: Apr. 1, 2001
By: Susan Sturm (Columbia Law School Faculty)
Citation: 101 Colum. L. Rev. 458 (2001)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
2:99−cv−00733 (W.D. Wash.)
EE-WA-0050-9000.pdf | Detail
Date: 08/03/2000
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Consent Decree [ECF# 66]
EE-WA-0050-0001.pdf | Detail
Date: 08/03/2000
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Lasnik, Robert S. (W.D. Wash.)
EE-WA-0050-0001 | EE-WA-0050-9000
Plaintiff's Lawyers Cordon, Claire (Washington)
EE-WA-0050-9000
Rowe Hoogkamer, Carmen R. (Washington)
EE-WA-0050-9000
Smart, William Candler (Washington)
EE-WA-0050-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Phillips, Robin Williams (Washington)
EE-WA-0050-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -