CargoAdmin, Bureaucrats, Moderators (CommentStreams), fileuploaders, Interface administrators, newuser, Push subscription managers, Suppressors, Administrators
14,662
edits
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission: Difference between revisions
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (view source)
Revision as of 23:26, 21 December 2024
, 21 December 2024Text replacement - "The New York Times" to "The New York Times"
m (1 revision imported) |
m (Text replacement - "The New York Times" to "The New York Times") |
||
| Line 110: | Line 110: | ||
==Successes== | ==Successes== | ||
On May 1, 2013, a [[Davenport, Iowa]] jury awarded the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commissission damages totaling $240 million — the largest verdict in the federal agency's history — for disability discrimination and severe abuse.<ref name="EEOC">{{cite web|title=Jury Awards $240 Million for Long-Term Abuse of Workers with Intellectual Disabilities|url=https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/5-1-13b.cfm|publisher=U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission|access-date=29 April 2018|language=en|date=1 May 2013|archive-date=29 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180429093245/https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/5-1-13b.cfm|url-status=live}} {{PD-notice}}</ref> The jury agreed with the EEOC that Texas-based Hill County Farms, doing business in Iowa as Henry's Turkey Service, subjected a group of 32 men with intellectual disabilities to severe abuse and discrimination for a period between 2007 and 2009, after 20 years of similar mistreatment.<ref name="EEOC" /> This victory received international attention and was profiled in '' | On May 1, 2013, a [[Davenport, Iowa]] jury awarded the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commissission damages totaling $240 million — the largest verdict in the federal agency's history — for disability discrimination and severe abuse.<ref name="EEOC">{{cite web|title=Jury Awards $240 Million for Long-Term Abuse of Workers with Intellectual Disabilities|url=https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/5-1-13b.cfm|publisher=U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission|access-date=29 April 2018|language=en|date=1 May 2013|archive-date=29 April 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180429093245/https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/5-1-13b.cfm|url-status=live}} {{PD-notice}}</ref> The jury agreed with the EEOC that Texas-based Hill County Farms, doing business in Iowa as Henry's Turkey Service, subjected a group of 32 men with intellectual disabilities to severe abuse and discrimination for a period between 2007 and 2009, after 20 years of similar mistreatment.<ref name="EEOC" /> This victory received international attention and was profiled in ''The New York Times''.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/03/09/us/the-boys-in-the-bunkhouse.html|title=The 'Boys' in the Bunkhouse|first=Dan|last=Barry|newspaper=The New York Times|date=8 March 2014|access-date=28 April 2018|archive-date=17 May 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180517014016/https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/03/09/us/the-boys-in-the-bunkhouse.html|url-status=live}}</ref> | ||
On June 1, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held in an [[Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores|8–1 decision]] written by Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] that an employer may not refuse to hire an applicant if the employer was motivated by avoiding the need to accommodate a religious practice. Such behavior violates the prohibition on religious discrimination contained in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.<ref name="EEOC 2">{{cite web|title=Supreme Court Rules in Favor of EEOC in Abercrombie Religious Discrimination Case|url=https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/6-1-15.cfm|publisher=U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission|access-date=29 April 2018|language=en|date=1 June 2015|archive-date=22 October 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181022141032/http://www1.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/6-1-15.cfm|url-status=live}} {{PD-notice}}</ref> EEOC General Counsel David Lopez hailed the decision. "At its root, this case is about defending the quintessentially American principles of religious freedom and tolerance," Lopez said. "This decision is a victory for our increasingly diverse society and we applaud Samantha Elauf's courage and tenacity in pursuing this matter."<ref name="EEOC 2" /> | On June 1, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held in an [[Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores|8–1 decision]] written by Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] that an employer may not refuse to hire an applicant if the employer was motivated by avoiding the need to accommodate a religious practice. Such behavior violates the prohibition on religious discrimination contained in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.<ref name="EEOC 2">{{cite web|title=Supreme Court Rules in Favor of EEOC in Abercrombie Religious Discrimination Case|url=https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/6-1-15.cfm|publisher=U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission|access-date=29 April 2018|language=en|date=1 June 2015|archive-date=22 October 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181022141032/http://www1.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/6-1-15.cfm|url-status=live}} {{PD-notice}}</ref> EEOC General Counsel David Lopez hailed the decision. "At its root, this case is about defending the quintessentially American principles of religious freedom and tolerance," Lopez said. "This decision is a victory for our increasingly diverse society and we applaud Samantha Elauf's courage and tenacity in pursuing this matter."<ref name="EEOC 2" /> | ||