May 23, 2012

EEOC and ABM Industries Settle Discrimination and Retaliation Case for Latino Workers

Janitorial Company to Pay $180,000 and Train Supervisors

SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. – The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today announced the settlement of a lawsuit against ABM Industries (NYSE:ABM), a nationwide janitorial services firm. The suit alleged that supervisors at the company discriminated against Latino janitors working at several commercial buildings in downtown San Francisco by giving them less preferable assignments despite their seniority, removing them from long favored positions and other actions. The suit also alleged that ABM retaliated against some of these employees after they filed charges with the EEOC. ABM denied the allegations contained in the lawsuit, but agreed to settle the case following a court-ordered settlement conference.

Under the terms of the consent decree approved by United States Magistrate Judge Bernard Zimmerman (EEOC v. ABM Industries, Inc., Civ. No. CV09-4593 BZ), ABM will pay $180,000 in damages, and will institute measures to help prevent future national origin discrimination and retaliation, including annual anti-discrimination and diversity training for all supervisors and forepersons; annual notices to all employees in English, Spanish, Arabic and Chinese, on workplace diversity and their right to a workplace free from discrimination and retaliation; and refresher training for its human resources staff.

EEOC San Francisco Regional Attorney William R. Tamayo said, “These were serious allegations of discrimination. Census figures show that 34.4% of the San Francisco population was born outside the United States, and this large immigrant population is strongly reflected in ABM’s janitorial workforce. Under the decree, ABM will train its employees in the value of this diversity and affirms its obligations not to discriminate. Furthermore, performance evaluations of managers and supervisors will include evaluation of their effectiveness in preventing discrimination and retaliation as well as their ability to manage diversity and deal effectively with employees of all races and national origins. We are pleased that ABM worked with EEOC to reach this resolution.”

EEOC San Francisco District Director Michael Baldonado added, “We commend the workers who came to us and filed charges, who recognized a problem in their workplace and were willing to come to the EEOC to seek to remedy it. Their coming forward will result in positive changes in the workplace.”

© Copyright 2012 - U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

About the Author

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee because of the person's race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. It is also illegal to discriminate against a person because the person complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit.

Most employers with at least 15...

800-669-4000

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.