On September 30, 2004, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan against the Magna Donnelly Corp., Inc., a for profit corporation, under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). The EEOC claimed that the ...
read more >
On September 30, 2004, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan against the Magna Donnelly Corp., Inc., a for profit corporation, under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). The EEOC claimed that the corporation had failed to reasonably accommodate a woman who was able to perform the essential functions of the position yet suffered from disabilities, including multiple sclerosis. The EEOC asked the court to permanently enjoin the corporation from engaging in unlawful employment practice as well as grant relief to those employees against whom the discrimination had occurred.
Over the course of the next year, a number of settlement conferences were scheduled between the parties to take place before Magistrate Judge Ellen S. Carmod. And on October 26, 2005, Magistrate Judge Carmod granted plaintiffs' unopposed motion to consolidate the case with the ongoing litigation in EEOC. v Magna Donnelly Corporation, Inc., EE-MI-0047
. Both cases had been brought under the ADA, and dealt with the same corporation's employment discrimination practices and policies. Settlement conferences continued between the parties, and a proposed consent decree was submitted to the court on November 28, 2006.
On December 15, 2006, United States District Judge Richard A. Enslen approved the consent decree and dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs to either party. The decree included monetary compensation for back pay to the injured employees, totaling $100,000. The corporation also agreed to provide ADA training in the normal course to managers, supervisors, and human resources staff according to a training program developed by defense counsel that had been reviewed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The decree also included a retaliatory prohibition. The decree would remain in effect for one year and include reporting to the EEOC to ensure compliance.Richard Jolly - 10/11/2014