Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Essay Example

“Mcdonald’s USA to Pay $50,000 to Settle EEOC Sex Harassment Suit”

According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, McDonald’s USA, LLC supervisor harassed a fellow male teenage employee in Perth Amboy, N.J., restaurants. From the lawsuit filed in New Jersey’s District Court on September 29, 2009, an assistant store manager, touched, hugged and spanked the 16-17 year old teenager after making lewd comments that made the victim uncomfortable. In U.S. District Court for District of New Jersey the Judge William J. Martini through the consent decree on October 19, required McDonald to take important measures to prevent workplace harassments in the future, in addition to paying $50,000, to the victim. The company was also expected to train its managers and employees on federal discrimination laws, collaborate with the authority’s compliance monitoring, and maintain anti-discrimination policies (EEOC, 2010).

Fundamentally the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) enforces laws that seek to curb discrimination against employees. Discrimination against a person based on their sex, age, race, origin, color, or disability is illegal, whether or not the person filed a discrimination charge or complained of discrimination. Although mandated to investigate discrimination charges, the authority does not always file lawsuits in all cases of discrimination. Once an allegation has been reported, an investigation is conducted to fairly and aptly settle the charge. If the effort to settle the charge is unsuccessful, a lawsuit is filed in an effort to protect the rights of the individual so discriminated against. Apart from filing lawsuits after an incident of discrimination, the EEOC also seeks to prevent discrimination from taking place through education, outreach and technical assistance programs. On all aspects of the Federal government, the EEOC provides guidance and leadership to federal agencies by ensuring compliance with EEOC resolutions (Irving, 2010).

As an agency tasked with the mandate to enforce laws that prohibit discrimination in the job environments, the EEOC’s was responsible with bringing the lawsuit against McDonald’s USA, LLC. Prior to resorting filing the lawsuit, the agency had to investigate the discrimination allegations for a fair charge. Once the lawsuit is settled in a court and the stipulated fines paid, the EEOC ensures that the company adequately follows the prescribed measures to the latter. In this case, McDonald’s was to comply with EEOC regulations and policies on discriminations. EEOC’s compliance monitoring would be adhered to; a complaint procedure and anti-discrimination policy kept; and EEOC remedial posters and notices maintained. According to EEOC (2010) certain prohibited practices according to the EEOC cater for employees’ job advertisements, recruitment, application and hiring, job referrals, job assignments abs promotions, pay and benefits, discipline and discharge, employment references, reasonable (accommodation and disability, training and apprenticeships programs), harassment, and terms and conditions of employment (Livingston, 1993).

The harassment lawsuit brought by EEOC against McDonalds promotes social change, especially among employees in the company. Considering the repercussions befalling the assistant store manager, other employees in the company would most likely reform due to fear of undergoing similar trouble that the colleague faced. Similarly, the employees publicly would learn from the lawsuit as the consequences of paying $50,000 or jail sentences for lack of funds, is sure to ensure professionalism in the workplace. Similarly, employees likely to suffer discrimination and abuses would learn from the lawsuit as it presents the possibility of getting their rights protected through such agencies as EEOC. Organizations as well as firms would benefit from protection by EEOC and other agencies on similar lawsuits, as far as investigations and settling charges, is concerned. As for the public in general, successful lawsuits such as EEOC against McDonalds promote openness among individuals who have once been discriminated but whose claims were not addressed. Such situations whereby bosses, managers, presidents or supervisors of companies improperly treat their employees, have gone unreported because of fear of losing jobs or thinking that no one would listen to their stories. As such, publicizing of such lawsuits helps to inform employees of their rights against the employing company, irrespective of how low their positions are in the companies (EEOC, 2010).

The EEOC press release precisely elaborates on the lawsuit details from the name of the company, its residence and the Civil Action number unlike the news item which summarizes most of the aspects of the lawsuit. The agency provides adequate information on the lawsuit because it is an organization that is legally mandated to deal with such issues. However, the news item is one of the many issues that the organization reports and therefore does not necessarily give the full details of the lawsuit. Secondly, the press release is purely based on the proceedings of the case always basing their information on the court ruling. On the other hand, the news item partly depends on the factual information of the lawsuit as well as the author’s opinion on such lawsuits. The news item is open for comments by both authors and readers as it is a public domain, unlike the press release (Bloomberg, 2010).

As a senior manager of McDonalds, I’d ensure my company’s position in the multicultural workplace by complying with the EEOC regulation and policies on discrimination. Employees and managers will be trained on the anti-discrimination federal laws and policies to ensure they understand the consequence of the vice on the company’s performance. Equality among employees as far as protection of their rights is concerned will ensure ease and cooperation within the workforce. In case of charge of discrimination brought against the company, efforts to settle the charge before it becomes a lawsuit will be encouraged in order to protect the position and publicity of the company. Settling charges also protects the employees from public scrutiny and exposure especially if teenagers are involved.

In order to cooperate with EEOC guidelines, company must ensure that the managers and employees are adequately trained on all policies and regulations of the EEOC; informed of the company’s position on the discrimination policies; consequences of a lawsuit brought by the employee to the company; and the benefits accruing to employees responsibly following company stipulations. Similarly, effort to educate the public on the rights and powers of companies concerning discrimination would go along way in preventing the negative perception of companies reported for such offences. Instead the vices should be made a common aspect of the operation of the companies in order for mutual cooperation between the companies and corporate.

References

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC]. (2010). “Mcdonald’s USA To Pay $50,000 To Settle EEOC Sex Harassment Suit”. Retrieved on October 23, 2010 from http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/10-20-10d.cfm

Bloomberg. (2010). “Mcdonald’s USA to Pay $50,000 to Settle EEOC Harassment Suit”. Retrieved October 23, 2010 from http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&tkr=MCD:US&sid=a1m.9qdWUAV0

Livingston, D. R. (1993). The Civil Rights Act of 1991 & EEOC Enforcement, 23 STETSON L. REv. 53, 93.

Irving, J. (2010, October). Fight Sexual Harassment, “Mcdonald’s USA To Pay $50,000 To Settle EEOC Sex Harassment Suit”. Retrieved on October 23, 2010 from http://fightsexualharassment.blogspot.com/