Advertisement

May 24, 2013

Frank A. Mora to Pay $43,000 to Settle Sexual Harassment Lawsuit

General Manager of Dry Cleaning Service Routinely Asked Female Employee for Sexual Favors, Federal Agency Says

McALLEN, Texas – Frank A. Mora, individually, and as the authorized corporate officer of Two Lac, Inc. d/b/a Oasis One Dry Cleaners, a McAllen, Texas dry cleaning and laundry service, will pay $43,000 and provide significant remedial relief to a former female employee who was subjected to a sexually hostile work environment, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced today, June 25, 2012.

The EEOC’s suit (Civil Action Number 7:11-cv-209) filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, McAllen Division, charged that a female employee at Oasis Dry Cleaners routinely experienced sexual harassment from its general manager who solicited sexual favors and often approached her speaking in a suggestive manner and placing his hands on her body.

Such alleged behavior violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits sex discrimination, including sexual harassment. The EEOC filed suit after first attempting to settle the case through its conciliation process.

In addition to providing $43,000 in monetary damages to the former employee, the two-year Consent Decree resolving the case enjoins Frank A. Mora, individually, and as the authorized corporate officer of Two Lac, Inc. d/b/a Oasis One Dry Cleaners from discriminating against employees based on sex and requires the following:

  • Adoption, implementation and distribution of a bilingual Spanish/English sexual harassment and retaliation policy;
  • Two hours of bilingual Spanish/English training to all employees, officials, managers and supervisors working at the dry cleaning facility located at 120 E. Nolana, McAllen, Texas; and
  • Posting notices in Spanish and English of the intent to comply with Title VII.

“Employees have a legal right to go to work every day without the anxiety of being subjected to harassment related to their gender,” said EEOC Senior Trial Attorney David Rivela of the agency’s San Antonio Field Office. “We are pleased that Mr. Mora is taking the steps necessary to provide a discrimination-free environment for his personnel.”

Janet Elizondo, Acting District Director for the Dallas District Office which oversees San Antonio, said, “I think this case is a great example of how the Commission remains diligent in its enforcement efforts to root out sexual harassment in the workplace.”

Judith G. Taylor, Supervisory Trial Attorney of the San Antonio Field Office, added, “Here, the employer’s hiring a family member to manage day-to-day operations appears to have resulted in the failure to acknowledge or address an employee’s complaint that the family member was engaging in sexually harassing conduct. Businesses should exercise care to avoid discriminatory actions or inactions motivated by familiarity.”

In fiscal year 2011, 11,364 charges of sexual harassment were filed with the EEOC and state or local agencies nationwide.

© 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.