-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

,L\PR 2 4

ANDERSON DIVISION

LARRY W. PROPES, CLERK
U. S. DISTRICT COURt

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

COMMISSION,

) )

Go'(0·.--,-- 1"lJ.."4 C)t - .~~L)": If',(fL,V......

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

) COMPLAINT

) (lUR Y TRIAL DEMAND)

RANDSTAD STAFFING SERVICES, INC.,

)

)

Defendant.

)

NATURE OF THE ACTION This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex and retaliation, and to provide appropriate relief to Kellie N. Acker, Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers, and a class of women who were not referred for work by Defendant because of their gender, female, all of whom were adversely affected by such practices. Defendant is an employment agency that refers workers for employment with its employer clients. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleges that Kellie N. Acker, who was employed by Defendant as a Staffing Supervisor, opposed a discriminatory request made by one of Defendant's employer clients; specifically, the client requested that Defendant not refer women for employment. The EEOC contends that Defendant subsequently retaliated against Ms. Acker because of her opposition to the client's discriminatory request. Further, the EEOC alleges that Defendant acquiesced to the client's request for discriminatory referrals based on gender and discriminated against Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers, and a class of women who were not referred for work by Defendant because of their gender, female.
\

-
JURlSDICTION AND VENUE
1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and
1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(l) and (3) ("Title VII") and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991,42 U.S.C. § 1981a. 2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for South Carolina, Anderson Division.
PARTIES 3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, is the agency of the United
States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(l) and (3). 4. At all relevant times, Defendant, Randstad Staffing Services, Inc., a Georgia corporation, has continuously been doing business in the State of South Carolina and the City of Anderson, and has continuously had at least 15 employees. 5. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701 (b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.c. §§ 2000e(b), (g) and (h). 6. At all relevant times, Defendant, Randstad Staffing Services, Inc., doing business as Randstad North America, has procured for employees opportunities to work for an employer and has been an employment agency within the meaning of Section 701 (c) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(c).
2

-
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 7. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Kellie N. Acker filed a charge
with the EEOC alleging violations of Title VII by Defendant. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 8. Since at least late January 2000, Defendant has engaged in unlawful employment practices at its Anderson, South Carolina, facility, in violation of Title VII as follows: A. By taking adverse employment actions against Kellie N. Acker, including
discharging her, because she opposed a client's request not to refer female employees based on their gender, female, in violation of Section 704(a), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a); and B. By failing and refusing to refer for employment qualified women because of their gender, female, in violation of Section 703(b), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(b). 9. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraph 8(A) above has been to deprive Kellie N. Acker of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect her status as an employee because of her opposition to a practice made an unlawful employment practice by Title VII. 10. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraph 8(B) above has been to deprive Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers, and a class of similarly situated women who were not referred for work by Defendant because of their gender, female, of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their gender, female. 11. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 8 above were intentional.
3

-
12. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 8 above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Kellie N. Acker, Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers, and a class of similarly situated women who were not referred for work by Defendant because of their gender, female. PRA YER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the EEOC respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its officers, successors,
assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from retaliating against employees who engage in protected activity, discriminating against women because of their gender, female, and engaging in any other employment practice which discriminates against indviduals who engage in protected activity or on the basis of gender.
B. Order Defendant to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for individuals who engage in protected activity and for women and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices.
C. Order Defendant to make whole Kellie N. Acker, Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers, and a class of similarly situated women who were not referred for work by Defendant because of their gender, female, by providing appropriate backpay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices, including but not limited to the reinstatement of Ms. Acker, and new referrals of work for Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, ConsolIa Stowers, and a class of similarly situated women who were not referred for work by Defendant because of their gender, female.
4

-

-

D. Order Defendant to make whole Kellie N. Acker, by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraph 8(A) above, including relocation expenses, job search expenses, and medical expenses not covered by the Employer's employee benefit plan, in amounts to be determined at trial.
E. Order Defendant to make whole Kellie N. Acker by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraph 8(A) above, including emotional pain, suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, humiliation, embarrassment, inconvenience, and loss of civil rights, in amounts to be determined at trial.
F. Order Defendant to make whole Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers, and a class of similarly situated women who were not referred for work by Defendant because of their gender, female, by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraph 8(B) above, including inconvenience and loss of civil rights in amounts to be determined at trial.
G. Order Defendant to pay Kellie N. Acker, Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers, and a class of similarly situated women who were not referred for work by Defendant because of their gender, female, punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct described in paragraph 8 above, in amounts to be determined at trial.
H. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest.
I. Award the EEOC its costs of this action.

5

-
JURY TRIAL DEMAND The EEOC requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint. Dated this 24th day of April, 2003.
GWENDOL YN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel MINDY E. WEINSTEIN Regional Attorney
~~~f14
ED IN . TURNAGE Trial Attorney Federal ID# 5189 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION 301 N. Main Street Landmark Building, Suite 1402 Greenville, SC 29601 (864) 241-4406
6

-

-

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

or I hereby certify that a true and correct copy EEOC':; SUl11ll1ons, CUlllpLlint & Rule

26.0 I Responses were served upon the Defendant by and thl' gh his/ her registered agent of

record via First Class, US Mail, postage prepaid, this

day or April, 2003 addressed as

utA.)- ., .....- -u--- n' Collows: (t~L-\~~'" I ~~ • - ........ '-""'I'": -, c) I. A

-::t;:l 00 I 0 '3 ~O l'oo ~ ;).'3 "Ii 0 I, Q'7d

Randstad Staffing Services, Inc. c/o Corporation Service Company
Registered Agent ["or DeICndcllll 40 Technology Parkway South. {nO()
Norcross, Georgia 30(Jl)2

Greenville. South Carolina 29()OI (8M) 241-4425

 
 -

-

FILED

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ANDERSON DIVISION

JUL 1 0 2003
LARRY W. PROPES, CLERK
U. S. DISTRICT COURT

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY) COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v.
RANDSTAD STAFFING SERVICES, INC., STAFFING RESOURCES (SC), L.P., RANDSTAD GENERAL PARTNER (US) LLC, and RANDSTAD NORTH AMERICA, L.P., all doing business as RANDSTAD NORTH AMERICA
Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION NO.

)

8:03 1449 25AK

)

)

)

AMENDED

)

COMPLAINT

)

(JURY TRIAL DEMAND)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

-------------------------------)

NATURE OF THE ACTION

This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil

Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex and retaliation,

and to provide appropriate relief to Kellie N. Acker, Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers,

and a class of women who were not referred for work by Defendants because of their gender, female, all of whom were adversely affected by such practices. Defendants are part of an integrated, international network of corporations and limited partnerships owned, directly or indirectly, by Randstad Holding nv, a Dutch employment agency that refers workers for

employment with its employer clients. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleges that Kellie N. Acker, who was employed by Defendants as a Staffing Supervisor, opposed a discriminatory request made by one of Defendants' employer clients; specifically, the client requested that Defendants not refer women for employment. The EEOC contends that

-

-

Defendants subsequently retaliated against Ms. Acker because of her opposition to the client's discriminatory request. Further, the EEOC alleges that Defendants acquiesced to the client's request for discriminatory referrals based on gender and discriminated against Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers, and a class of women who were not referred for work by Defendants because of their gender, female.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451,1331,1337,1343 and
1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3) ("Title VII") and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991,42 U.S.C. § 1981a. 2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for South Carolina, Anderson Division.
PARTIES 3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, is the agency of the United
States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3). 4. At all relevant times, Defendant, Randstad North America, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership owned, directly or indirectly, by Randstad Holding nv, a Dutch company, has continuously been doing business in the State of South Carolina and the City of Anderson through its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, and has continuously had at least 15 employees.

2

-

-

5. At all relevant times, Defendant, Randstad General Partner (US) LLC, a Delaware corporation, has continuously been doing business in the State of South Carolina and the City of Anderson through its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, and has continuously had at least 15 employees.
6. At all relevant times, Defendant, Randstad Staffing Services, Inc., a Georgia corporation, has continuously been doing business in the State of South Carolina and the City of Anderson, and has continuously had at least 15 employees.
7. At all relevant times, Defendant, Staffing Resources (SC), L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, has continuously been doing business in the State of South Carolina and the City of Anderson, and has continuously had at least 15 employees.
8. At all relevant times, Defendants, an integrated enterprise doing business as Randstad North America, have continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g) and (h).
9. At all relevant times, Defendants, an integrated enterprise doing business as Randstad North America, have procured for employees opportunities to work for an employer and have been an employment agency within the meaning of Section 701(c) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(c). STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
10. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Kellie N. Acker filed a charge with the EEOC alleging violations of Title VII by Defendants. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.

3

-

-

11. Since at least late January 2000, Defendants have engaged in unlawful employment practices at its Anderson, South Carolina, facility, in violation of Title VII as follows: A. By taking adverse employment actions against Kellie N. Acker, including discharging her, because she opposed a client's request not to refer female employees based on their gender, female, in violation of Section 704(a), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a); and B. By failing and refusing to refer for employment qualified women because of their gender, female, in violation of Section 703(b), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(b).
12. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraph II(A) above has been to deprive Kellie N. Acker of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect her status as an employee because of her opposition to a practice made an unlawful employment practice by Title VII.
13. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraph 11(B) above has been to deprive Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers, and a class of similarly situated women who were not referred for work by Defendants because of their gender, female, of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their gender, female.
14. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 11 above were intentional.
15. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 11 above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Kellie N. Acker, Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers, and a class of similarly situated women who
4

-

-

were not referred for work by Defendants because of their gender, female. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Wherefore, the EEOC respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendants, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from retaliating against employees who engage in protected activity, discriminating against women because of their gender, female, and engaging in any other employment practice which discriminates against indviduals who engage in protected activity or on the basis of gender. B. Order Defendants to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for individuals who engage in protected activity and for women and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices. C. Order Defendants to make whole Kellie N. Acker, Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers, and a class of similarly situated women who were not referred for work by Defendants because of their gender, female, by providing appropriate backpay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices, including but not limited to the reinstatement of Ms. Acker, and new referrals of work for Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers, and a class of similarly situated women who were not referred for work by Defendants because of their gender, female. D. Order Defendants to make whole Kellie N. Acker, by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in
5

-

-

paragraph 11 (A) above, including relocation expenses, job search expenses, and medical

expenses not covered by the Employer's employee benefit plan, in amounts to be determined at

trial. E.

Order Defendants to make whole Kellie N. Acker by providing compensation for

past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraph 11 (A) above, including emotional pain, suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, humiliation, embarrassment, inconvenience, and loss of civil rights, in amounts to be determined

at trial. F. Order Defendants to make whole Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers,
and a class of similarly situated women who were not referred for work by Defendants because of

their gender, female, by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses

resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraph 11 (B) above, including inconvenience and loss of civil rights in amounts to be determined at trial.

G. Order Defendants to pay Kellie N. Acker, Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers, and a class of similarly situated women who were not referred for work by Defendants

because of their gender, female, punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct

described in paragraph 11 above, in amounts to be determined at trial.

H. interest.

Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public

1.

Award the EEOC its costs of this action.

6

",....

-

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

The EEOC requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.

i±.b..- Dated this

day of July, 2003.

GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel

MINDY E. WEINSTEIN Regional Attorney

Trial Attorney Federal ID# 5189 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION 301 N. Main Street Landmark Building, Suite 1402 Greenville, SC 29601 (864) 241-4406

7

-

-

CERTIFICATE OF SER\ICE
I hereby certify that a true anc! correct copy olthe EEOC's Amended Complaint and Amended Summons as well as the attachments thereto \'v'ere served upon the Defendant by and through his/ her counsel of record via First Class, US MaiL postage prepaid, this _ _9th_ day of July, 2003 addressed as follows:

Joseph A. Rhodes, .II'" Esq, I1AYNSWORTH BALDWIN .I0HNSOl\ & (iRI:A \TS, LLC
PO, Box I ()888 Grecl1\illc. SOllth Carolina 2lJCl03

/)
L,:g~i11L'C1111ICi~1I1
l:qual Empluyment OpportUl1lty Commission
:W 1 North Main Street. Suite 1402 Greenville, South Carolina 29601
(864) 241-4425

 
 E'[EDd~

FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ANDERSON DIVISION

SEP 3 0 2003

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

)

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

RANDSTAD STAFFING SERVICES, INC.,

)

STAFFING RESOURCES eSC), L.P.,

)

RANDSTAD GENERAL PARTNER (US) LLC, )

and RANDSTAD NORTH AMERICA, L.P.,

)

all doing business as

)

RANDSTAD NORTH AMERICA

)

)

Defendants.

)

CIVIL ACTION NO. LARRY W. PROPES, CLERK

8:03 1449 2SAK

U~ S. DISTRICT COURT

CONSENT DECREE

------------------------------)

On April 24, 2003, Plaintiff~ the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (lithe

EEOC) filed this action charging Defendants Randstad Staffing Services, Inc., Staffing

Resources (SC), L.P., Randstad General Partner (US) LLC, and Randstad North America, L.P.

("Defendants"), part of a network of corporations and limited partnerships that operate a

temporary employment agency, \vith violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as

amended, 42 U.S.c. § 2000e, et seq. ("Title VII"). The EEOC contends that, from at least

January 2000, Defendants unlawfully refused and failed to refer employees and applicants for

employment because of their sex (female), and retaliated against Kellie Acker because she

opposed a client's discriminatory request.

The EEOC instituted this action pursuant to Section 706(f}(1) and (3) of Title VII and

Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U. S.c. § 1981 a. The EEOC and Defendants

agree that the subject matter of this action is proper and hereby stipulate to jurisdiction of the

Court over the parties. The parties now wish to resolve this lawsuit without the burden, expense,

and delay of further litigation. It is therefore the finding of this COUli, made on the pleadings and

the record as a whole, that: (1) the Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subj ect matter

of this action; (2) the purpose and provisions of Title VII will be promoted and etlectuated by the

entry of the Consent Decree; and (3) this Consent Decree resolves all matters in controversy
1fY

o

~\

between the parties as provided in paragraphs 1 through 16 below.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows:

A. PROHIBITION AGAINST DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION

1.

Defendants shall not discriminate against employees on the basis of sex by denying equal

employment opportunities to persons because of their sex and specifically shall not abide

by employer requests for persons of a certain sex or any other protected classification.

2.

Defendants shall not discriminate or retaliate against any person because of opposition to

any practice made unlawful under Title VII, or because of the filing of a charge, the

giving of testimony or assistance, or the participation in any investigation, proceeding or

hearing under Title VII.

3. Defendants shall advise any employer that makes a discriminatory refenal request that

Defendants' policy and the employment laws of the United States prohibit Defendants

from accepting any orders or requests that may specify the race, sex, age, religion, color

or national origin of refenals unless the religion, sex or national origin is a bona fide

occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular

business.

B. MONETARY DISTRIBUTIONS TO AGGRIEVED PERSONS

4.

Defendants shall pay Kellie Acker the sum of Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000) in

settlement of the EEOC's claim on her behalf. Defendants shall make payment by

issuing a check payable to Kellie Acker. Payment shall be made within 14 days after

Defendant receives the Court-approved Consent Decree, and Defendants shall mail the

check for Ms. Acker to an address to be provided to Defendants by the EEOC. Of this

payment, Seven Thousand Four Hundred and Fifty-Six Dollars ($7,556) shall be

designated as payment in comiJl'omlse of alleged backpay (including pre-judgment

interest) and shall be subject to all applicable taxes and payroll withholdings. The

balance shall be designated as payment in compromise for alleged compensatory damages
V-
2

o

and subject to no withholdings. Defendants shall mail to Bobby C. Simpson, Acting

Regional Attorney, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 129 West Trade Street,

Suite 400, Charlotte, NC 28202, a copy of the check and proof of its delivery to Ms.

Acker.

5.

Defendants shall pay Brenda Dorn, Linda Geer, Consolla Stowers, and a class of similarly

situated women who were not referred for work by Defendants because of their gender,

female, a cumulative sum of Twenty-Seven Thousand Dollars ($27,000) in settlement of

the claims raised in this action. The $27,000 shall be designated as payment in

compromise of alleged backpay (including pre-judgment interest) and shall be subject to

all applicable taxes and payroll withholdings. The $27 ,000 \vill be held in lfust by

Defendants pending final distribution as set forth in this paragraph. Within twenty days

of this Consent Decree or sooner, Defendants shall serve counsel for the EEOC with a list

of all of the women in Defendants' Anderson, South Carolina, database who were eligible

for light industrial work from February 1,2000 through August 1, 2002.1 The list shall be

provided in writing and electronically, on computer disk, in Microsoft Excel (or

comparable) format. Within ninety days after Defendants serve counsel for the EEOC

with the list of women, the EEOC shall serve on counsel for Defendants a final list of

aggrieved persons and the amounts due to each person. Within 14 days after counsel for

Defendants receives the final list of aggrieved persons, Defendants shall mail a check to

each aggrieved person in the amount specified by the EEOC. Within 14 days after

mailing these payments, Defendants shall mail to Bobby C. Simpson, Acting Regional Attorney, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 129 West Trade Street, Suite

400, Charlotte, NC 28202, a copy of the check and proof of its delivery to the aggrieved

ITo the extent possible, the list shall include the full name, last known address and

telephone number, and Social Security Number of each individual. In addition, to the extent

possible, Defendants shall provide the EEOC the dates each person was entered into and

terminated from the Anderson, South Carolina, database and all information known to

Defendants which may indicate that the individual would not have been qualified for work at the

warehouse client known to Defendants.

V

o

3

persons.

6. If any of the payments to aggrieved persons are returned by the postal service to

Defendants as undeliverable, Defendants shall immediately notify the EEOC of the name

of each such aggrieved person(s). The EEOC shall have thirty days after notice to locate

these individuals so that the payment(s) may be re-mailed to them by Defendants. If the

EEOC is unable to locate the individual(s), the EEOC shall notify Defendants. Within 14

days thereafter, Defendants shall redistribute the unpaid funds to the other aggrieved

persons by mailing each a check in an amount specified by the EEOC. Within 14 days

after mailing these payments, Defendants shall mail to Bobby C. Simpson, Acting

Regional Attorney, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 129 Wes.t Trade Street,

Suite 400, Charlotte, NC 28202, a copy of the check and proof of its delivery to the

aggrieved persons.

C. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

7. During the term of this Consent Decree, Defendants shall notify Bobby C. Simpson,

Acting Regional Attorney, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 129 West Trade

Street, Suite 400, Charlotte, NC 28202, if the warehouse client, which client is known to

Defendants and was identified to Defendants by the EEOC in separate correspondence,

makes additional discriminatory requests. In the event of such a report, Defendants shall

provide tEe details of the request made, the person to whom it was made, and the date.

Defendants shall also inform the EEOC if the client stated to Defendants that it ceased

doing business with Defendants because of Defendants' refusal to comply with the

discriminatory request.

8. During the term of this Consent Decree, Defendants shall provide the EEOC with annual

reports. The reports shall include the following information: (a) the identity of all internal

employees who have complained of or reported retaliation at Defendants' Branch Offices

in South Carolina, including by way of identification each person's name, home address,

home telephone number, social security number, and sex; (b) a brief statement regarding
co-

o

4

the nature of the individual's complaint; and (c) a description of what action Defendants

took in response to the individual's complaint. The first annual report is due no later than

120 days after the date this Consent Decree is filed. Defendants will provide the EEOC

these reports every year during the term of this Consent Decree.

D. TRAINING REQUIREMENTS

9. During the term of this Consent Decree, Defendants shall provide annual training to all of

Defendants' internal employees who work at the Anderson facility, and all its internal

employees responsible for management of the Anderson facility, including the Market

Manager. Each of the training programs shall include an explanation of the following

subjects: (I) the requirements of the federal equal employment opportunity.laws,

including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and its prohibition against sex

discrimination in the workplace; (2) the EEOC's guidance regarding Title VII's

prohibition against discrimination by an employment agency, including Title VII's

prohibition against discrimination in referrals of individuals for employment based on

their sex, race, color, religion, or national origin; and (3) Title VII's prohibition against

retaliation in the workplace, including the protection of employees who refuse to honor

discriminatory referral requests by employers. The first training in accordance with this

paragraph shall be completed within 120 days after the date this Consent Decree is filed.

Within 10 days after completion of the training, Defendants shall certify to the EEOC that

the specific training required was undertaken and it shall provide the EEOC with a roster

of all employees in attendance, including the job titles of all attendees.

E. NOTICE POSTING

10. During the term of this Consent Decree, Defendants shall conspicuously post the attached

Employee Notice, marked Attachment A and hereby made a part of this Consent Decree,

in a place where it is visible to employees who work at the facilities at Defendants'

Anderson facility. If the Notice becomes defaced or unreadable, Defendants shall replace

it by posting another copy of the Notice.

(y

o

5

/
F. PERSONNEL FILE AND REFERENCES II. Defendants shall remove from Ms. Acker's personnel file all references to her discharge.
Such references shall be changed to indicate that Ms. Acker's file was changed by mutual agreement to state she separated from employment. In addition, if any individual or organization contacts Defendants about Ms. Acker, Defendants shall not make any negative references about Ms. Acker's work for Defendants. Rather, Defendants shall provide only the following information about Ms. Acker: her dates of employment; position; and salary.
G. ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS 12. Defendants agree that the EEOC may review compliance with this Consent,Decree. As
part of such review, the EEOC may inspect the Anderson, South Carolina premises, interview employees and examine and copy documents upon reasonable notice to Defendants. 13. If anytime during the tenn of this Consent Decree the EEOC believes Defendants are in violation of this Consent Decree, the EEOC shall give notice of the alleged violation to Defendants. Defendants shall have 10 days in which to investigate and respond to the allegations. Thereafter, the parties shall have a period of 20 days, or such additional period as may be agreed upon by them. in which to engage in negotiation and conciliation regarding such allegations, before the EEOC pursues any remedy provided by law. 14. This Court shall retain jurisdiction of this case for purpose of resolving controversies arising under this Consent Decree and for entry of any orders as may be necessary or appropriate.
G. TERM 15. The term of this Consent Decree sh-all be for 3 years after the date this Consent Decree is
filed.
6

/

H. COSTS

16. The parties shall bear their own attorneys' fees and costs.

~T~erry>L.tWL0 tlen M¥4-~

~ 2~ Dated:

United States District Judge
~

Florence, Sou 1 Carolma

[Signature pages follow]

o

7

WE CONSENT
Dated this 11tit day of ~m

,2003.

ERIC S. DREIBAND General Counsel

BOBBY C. SIMPSON Acting Regional Attorney

Trial Attorney Federal 10# 5189 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION 301 N. Main Street Landmark Building, Suite 1402 Greenville, SC 29601 (864) 241-4406

WE CONSENT
Dated this 2c;,-f~ day of at(.·yU/L.t

, 2003.

, 1 seph A. RhodS7' 1 Esq. 6 Fed. 1.0. No.: 3 :3
HAYNSWORTH BALDWIN JOHNSON & GREAVES, LLC
P.O. Box 10888 Greenville, South Carolina 29603-0888 (864) 271-7410 ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS

o

8

FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ANDERSON DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

)

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

Y.

)

)

RANDSTAD STAFFING SERVICES, INC.,

)

STAFFING RESOURCES (SC), L.P.,

)

RANDSTAD GENERAL PARTNER (US) LLC, )

and RANDSTAD NORTH AMERICA, L.P.,

)

all doing business as

)

RANDSTAD NORTH AMERICA

)

)

Defendants.

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 8:03 1449 25AK
NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES

1.

This Notice is posted pursuant to an agreement bet\veen Defendants Randstad Staffing

Services, Inc., Staffing Resources (SC), L.P., Randstad General Partner (US) LLC, and

Randstad North America, L.P. ("Randstad"), and the United States Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission (EEOC) arising from a case alleging sex discrimination and

retaliation.

2.

Pursuant to the agreement, Randstad agreed to settle the above-referenced action. In

addition, Randstad agreed not to discriminate or retaliate against other employees.

Finally, Randstad will provide annual training to the employees of Randstad and annual

reports t~ the EEOC for three years.

3.

Federal law requires that there be no discrimination against or harassment of any

employee or applicant for employment because of the employee's race, color. reI igion,

sex, national origin, age (40 or older) or disability. Federal law also prohibits retaliation

against employees because they have opposed unlawful employment discrimination,

participated in employment discrimination proceedings. or otherwise asserted their rights

under the laws enforced by the EEOC.

4.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a federal law which prohibits sex

discrimination or retaliation against any employee in all aspects of employment including,

but not limited to, hiring, promotion, discharge, pay, job training and fringe benefits.

Title VII also prohibits sexual harassment. Among other misconduct, Title VII prohibits,

Exhibit A-Page 1

temporary employment agencies from discriminating against employees in the referral for work

5.

Randstad hereby reaffirms its commitment to compliance with such federal law in all

respects. Randstad will not take any actions against employees because they have

exercised their rights, reported an alleged violation under the law or have given

testimony, assistance or participation in any investigation, proceeding or hearing

conducted by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

6. It is Randstad's policy to maintain a working environment free from sex discrimination and retaliation. Also, it is Randstad's policy not to honor discriminatory referral requests from employers. If an employer makes a discriminatory referral request, Randstad's employee must inform it that such a request violates Randstad's policy and the employment laws of the United States. Randstad's employee is to explain that Randstad will not accept any orders or requests that may specify the race, sex, age, religion, color or national origin of referrals unless the religion, sex or national origin is a bOl}a fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business. Additionally, the name and date and specific nature of the inquiry must be recorded by the employee who receives the request. Upon receipt of a discriminatory referral request, the employee receiving it must immediately notify his or her manager and Randstad' s Human Resources Department.

An employee has the right to report allegations of employment discrimination, harassment or retaliation in the workplace. An employee may contact the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission at the following address and telephone number for the purpose of filing a charge of employment discrimination.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Greenville Local Office
301 N. Main Street, Landmark Building, Suite 1402 Greenville, SC 29601 Tel: (864) 241-4400

Exhibit A-Page 2

 
 CM/ECF - scd - Docket Report

Page 1 of 4

U.S. District Court District of South Carolina (Anderson/Greenwood) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 8:03-cv-01449-TLW-WMC

CLOSED

EEOC v. Randstad Staffing, et al Assigned to: Judge Terry L Wooten Referred to: Magistrate Judge William M Catoe Demand: $0 Cause: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)

Date Filed: 04/24/2003 Date Terminated: 09/30/2003 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Edwin Lake Turnage Harris and Graves PO Box 6263 Greenville, SC 29606 864-235-1331 Fax: 864-235-1741 Email: elt@harrisgraves.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Randstad Staffing Services Inc doing business as Randstad North America
Defendant Staffing Resources SC LP doing business as Randstad North America
Defendant Randstad General Partner US LLC doing business as Randstad North America

represented by Joseph A Rhodes, Jr Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak and Stewart PO Box 2757 Greenville, SC 29602 864-271-1300 Fax: 864-241-1861 Email: drew.rhodes@ogletreedeakins.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Joseph A Rhodes, Jr (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Joseph A Rhodes, Jr (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY

https://ecf.scd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?148299374723224-L_353_0-1

6/8/2007

CM/ECF - scd - Docket Report

Page 2 of 4

Defendant
Randstad North America LP doing business as Randstad North America

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Joseph A Rhodes, Jr (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 04/24/2003 04/24/2003 04/24/2003 05/05/2003
06/10/2003 06/11/2003
06/20/2003 06/20/2003 07/07/2003 07/08/2003

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT; Service due by 8/22/03 for Randstad Staffing (jtho) (Entered: 04/24/2003)

2 SUMMONS issued for defendant Randstad Staffing (jtho) (Entered: 04/24/2003)

3 ANSWER to Local Rule 26 Interrogatories by plaintiff EEOC; jury demand (jtho) (Entered: 04/24/2003)

4 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of summons and complaint executed as to defendant Randstad Staffing 4/28/03 Assignment Interrogatories due on 5/28/03 for Randstad Staffing ; Answer due on 5/19/03 for Randstad Staffing executed by certified mail (jtho) (Entered: 05/05/2003)

5 ANSWER to Complaint by defendant Randstad Staffing (Attorney Joseph A Rhodes Jr), Assignment Interrogatories due on 6/20/03 for Randstad Staffing ; (jtho) (Entered: 06/10/2003)

6 CONFERENCE AND SCHEDULING ORDER setting 26(f) Conference no later than 6/30/03 ; 26(a) Initial Disclosures served by 7/14/03 ; 26(f) Report filed by 7/14/03 ; Joining of parties,amending of pleadings on 8/11/03 ; Plaintiff's ID of Experts set for 9/8/03 ; Defendant's ID of Experts set for 10/8/03 ; Records Custodian Affidavit filed by 1/30/04 ; Discovery cutoff 12/17/03 ; Motion In Limine filed by 2/23/04 ; Deadline for filing of all motions 12/31/03 ; 26(a)3 Pretrial Disclosures filed by 1/30/04 ; Pretrial Brief filed by 2/16/04 ; Jury Selection deadline set for 3/1/04 ; ADR Statement/Cert due by 12/31/03 Mediation deadline for 1/30/04 ( signed by Judge Terry L. Wooten )eod 6/11/03, svd. (jtho) (Entered: 06/11/2003)

7 Disclosure Statement of corporate affiliations filed by defendant Randstad Staffing (jtho) (Entered: 06/23/2003)

8 ANSWER to Local Rule 26 Interrogatories by defendant Randstad Staffing (jtho) (Entered: 06/23/2003)

9 MOTION with exhibits A-B by plaintiff EEOC to amend [1-1] complaint , for issuance of amended summons (jtho) (Entered: 07/08/2003)

10 ORDER granting [9-1] motion to amend [1-1] complaint, granting [9-2] motion for issuance of amended summons ( signed by Magistrate Judge

https://ecf.scd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?148299374723224-L_353_0-1

6/8/2007

CM/ECF - scd - Docket Report

Page 3 of 4

07/10/2003 07/10/2003 07/14/2003 07/14/2003 07/15/2003 07/16/2003
07/23/2003
08/05/2003 08/12/2003 08/25/2003

William M. Catoe ) eod 7/8/03, svd. (jtho) (Entered: 07/08/2003)
11 AMENDED COMPLAINT by plaintiff EEOC , (Answer due 7/21/03 for Randstad Staffing ) amending [1-1] complaint against defendant Staffing Resources, Randstad General, Randstad North; jury demand (jtho) (Entered: 07/10/2003)
12 SUMMONSES issued for defendant Staffing Resources, defendant Randstad General, defendant Randstad North (jtho) (Entered: 07/10/2003)
13 26(f) Report by EEOC, Randstad Staffing, Staffing Resources, Randstad General, Randstad N America L . Parties disagree to Conference and Scheduling Order, requesting more time as in proposed amended conference and scheduling order. (acas) (Entered: 07/15/2003)
14 26(f) Answers to Local Rule 26 Interrogatories by EEOC . (acas) (Entered: 07/15/2003)
15 26(f) Answers to Local Rule 26 Interrogatories by Randstad Staffing, Staffing Resources, Randstad General, Randstad N America L . (jtho) (Entered: 07/16/2003)
16 AMENDED CONFERENCE AND SCHEDULING ORDER setting Joining of parties,amending of pleadings on 8/11/03 ; Plaintiff's ID of Experts set for 9/8/03 ; Defendant's ID of Experts set for 10/8/03 ; Records Custodian Affidavit filed by 3/1/04 ; Discovery cutoff 12/17/03 ; Motion In Limine filed by 3/25/04 ; Deadline for filing of all motions 1/10/04 ; 26(a)3 Pretrial Disclosures filed by 3/1/04 ; Pretrial Brief filed by 3/18/04 ; Jury Selection deadline set for 4/1/04 ; ADR Statement/Cert due by 12/31/03 Mediation deadline for 2/15/04 ( signed by Magistrate Judge William M. Catoe ) eod 7/16/03, svd. (jtho) (Entered: 07/16/2003)
17 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of summons and complaint executed as to defendant Staffing Resources, defendant Randstad General 7/16/03 Assignment Interrogatories due on 8/15/03 for Randstad General, for Staffing Resources ; Answer due on 8/5/03 for Randstad General, for Staffing Resources executed by certified mail (jtho) (Entered: 07/23/2003)
18 ORDER reset answer due for 8/11/03 for Randstad N America L, for Randstad General, for Staffing Resources, for Randstad Staffing ( signed by Magistrate Judge William M. Catoe ) eod 8/5/03, svd.x (jtho) (Entered: 08/05/2003)
19 ANSWER by defendant Randstad Staffing, defendant Staffing Resources, defendant Randstad General, defendant Randstad N America L (Attorney Joseph A. Rhodes, Jr. ) to amended complaint (jtho) (Entered: 08/12/2003)
20 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of summons and complaint executed as to defendant Randstad N America L 8/1/03 Assignment Interrogatories due on 9/2/03 for Randstad N America L ; Answer due on 8/21/03 for

https://ecf.scd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?148299374723224-L_353_0-1

6/8/2007

CM/ECF - scd - Docket Report

Page 4 of 4

09/30/2003
09/30/2003 01/20/2004

Randstad N America L executed by certified mail (jtho) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
21 ORDER: Consent Decree approving settlement ( signed by Judge Terry L. Wooten ) eod 10/01/03, svd. (jtho) Modified on 10/01/2003 (Entered: 10/01/2003)
Case closed (jtho) (Entered: 10/01/2003)
22 ORDER that the Commission is granted an enlargement of time until February 18, 2004 to provide defendants the information required under paragraph 5 of the September 30, 2003 consent decree ( signed by Judge Terry L. Wooten ) eod 1/21/04, svd. (jtho) (Entered: 01/21/2004)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt

06/08/2007 15:41:54

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code: eeoc

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

8:03-cv-01449-TLWWMC

Billable Pages: 3

Cost:

0.24

https://ecf.scd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?148299374723224-L_353_0-1

6/8/2007