Sensient To Settle EEOC Disability Discrimination Lawsuit
Sensient Natural Ingredients LLC, a division of Sensient Technologies, has agreed to pay up to $800,000 ($600,000 to go to identified claimants and $200,000 for a potential group of unidentified claimants) and provide other significant relief to settle a charge of disability discrimination, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced.
According to the EEOC's lawsuit, several of Sensient's workers at its Livingston, Calif., location took extended leaves of absence for disability-related care, including surgeries and cancer treatments. The EEOC charged that employees were either discharged for surpassing the company's restrictive leave policy or were required to return to work without accommodations or restrictions. The EEOC contends that when employees attempted to return to work even without restrictions, Sensient refused to accept them back and fired them instead.
The EEOC filed its lawsuit in 2015 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California (EEOC v. Sensient Dehydrated Flavors Co., Sensient Natural Ingredients LLC, et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-01431-DAD-BAM) under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement.
As part of the consent decree settling the suit, Sensient will pay $600,000 to a class of eight claimants and $200,000 for a contingent class fund that will be distributed if other claimants come forward. In addition to the monetary relief, Sensient also agreed to the designation of an internal equal employment opportunity monitor to review and revise, as necessary, the company's policies against disability discrimination, retaliation, and its reasonable accommodation policies which include obtaining internal and external legal review of a denial of accommodation. Sensient further agreed to distribute the revised policies to all employees, provide training for both employees and management personnel, and designate an internal ADA coordinator who will assist the company in maintaining records. The EEOC will monitor Sensient's compliance with this three-year decree.
Judge clears diabetic ex-United flight attendant for new try at disability class action
Cook County Record
A former United Airlines flight attendant will get another chance to press her class action lawsuit against her former employer, alleging the airline terminated her and other employees for missing work due to diabetes, claiming the condition is a disability and not merely a common illness.
Tonia Tate was employed as a flight attendant with United Airlines from 1998 until Nov. 12, 2012. She alleges her Type I diabetes substantially limits her major life activities. Tate alleges that her physical impairment was amplified by standing for long periods of time while working as a flight attendant.
Tate alleged she was subjected to a hostile work environment and then fired from her position because her disability caused her to miss work.
Tate claims United treated her condition as a common illness, would not accommodate medical restrictions and has a history of terminating employees for missing work when absent from work due to similar disabilities. She is now pursuing a class action on behalf of herself and all persons with similar disabilities who were employed by United Airlines and discharged under United’s attendance policy.
United Airlines sought to strike Tate’s motion for a class-action suit, claiming this type of complaint based on the Americans with Disabilities Act is not conducive to class actions.
Judge William T. Hart wrote in the decision: “An order denying amendment to allege class action allegations or to strike class action allegations is functionally equivalent to an order denying class certifications.” Hart dismissed United’s attempt and referenced a previous case in which United complied with a ruling requiring it to provide reasonable accommodation to disabled employees and was required to modify its assessment, training and notice practices.
Hart granted Tate’s motion to file an amended complaint and ruled that time will be allowed for class-action discovery and the filing of a motion to certify a class. The hearing is set for Oct. 5.
Tate is represented in the action by the Austin Law Group LLC, of Hinsdale.
United is defended by the firm of Littler Mendelson P.C., of Chicago.
Legal News Line
A prospective federal class action lawsuit filed in New York City last week claims a retailer of online glasses violated both the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and New York laws by not providing proper website access for the visually-impaired.
Small Businesses Targeted By ADA Lawsuits
CBS San Francisco Bay Area
Small businesses beware: You are at risk of getting sued over disabled access.
His name is Scott Johnson, a disabled man notorious for suing businesses for violations of the Americans with Disablities Act.
We found more than 2,000 cases filed by Johnson in federal court, going back to 2004, targeting people like Dominic Speno, owner of this Best Western hotel in Patterson.
“He might as well have just brought a gun with him and said stick em up because essentially that is what this is about, this is a stickup!,” said Speno.