Case4:13-cv-05715-DMR Document1 Filed12/11/13 Page1 of 5

1 WILLIAM R. TAMAYO, SBN 084965 (CA) MARCIA L. MITCHELL, SBN 18122 (WA)
2 DERA A. SMITH, SBN 147863 (CA) U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
3 Phillip Burton Federal Building 450 Golden Gate Ave., 5th Floor West
4 P.O. Box 36025 San Francisco, CA 94102
5 Telephone: (415) 522-3034 Facsimile: (415) 522-3425
6 E-mail: debra.smith@eeoc.gov

7 Attorneys for Plaintiff EEOC

8

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11 U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY Case No.: CV 13-5715
12 COMMISSION,

13

Plaintiff,

14 vs.
15 CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH
16 CENTER,

COMPLAINT Civil Rights - Employment Discrimination DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

17

Defendant.

18

19

NATURE OF THE ACTION

20

This is an action under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, to

21 correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of disability (breast cancer) and to provide

22 appropriate relief to Charging Party, Imelda Tamayo, who was adversely affected by such practices.

23 Defendant Children’s Hospital and Research Center (“Defendant”) discriminated against Ms.

24 Tamayo, a qualified individual with a disability, by failing to provide her with a reasonable

25 accommodation and discharging her because of her disability and the extended treatment it required.

26

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

27

1. Jurisdiction of the Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343

28 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 107(a) of the Americans with

COMPLAINT & JURY DEMAND

1

Case4:13-cv-05715-DMR Document1 Filed12/11/13 Page2 of 5

1 Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), as amended by the ADA Amendments Act

2 of 2008, which incorporates by reference section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights

3 Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3), and pursuant to Section 102 of the

4 Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a.

5

2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were and are now being committed

6 within the State of California, County of Alameda and City of Oakland, thus venue is proper “in any

7 judicial district in the State in which the unlawful employment practice is alleged to have been

8 committed.” (Section 706(f)(3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5(f)(3)). Venue is therefore proper

9 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

10

INTRA-DISTRICT ASSIGNMENT

11

3. This action is appropriate for assignment to the Oakland Division of the Northern

12 District of California because the adverse actions alleged herein took place in Oakland, California

13 and because Defendant, its records and witnesses are located in Oakland, California.

14

PARTIES

15

4. Plaintiff, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the “Commission”),

16 is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and

17 enforcement of Title I of the ADA and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 107(a)

18 of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), as amended, which incorporates by reference sections 706(f)(1)

19 and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3), as amended.

20

5. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously done business as Children’s

21 Hospital and Research Center, a California non-profit regional medical center, doing business in the

22 State of California, in the County of Alameda, and has continuously had at least fifteen (15)

23 employees.

24

6. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been an employer engaged in an

25 industry affecting commerce under section 101(5) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(5), and Section

26 101(7) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(7), as amended, which incorporates by reference Section

27 701(g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(g) and (h).

28

7. At all relevant times, the Defendant has been a covered entity under Section 101(2) of

COMPLAINT & JURY DEMAND

2

Case4:13-cv-05715-DMR Document1 Filed12/11/13 Page3 of 5

1 the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(2), as amended.

2

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

3

8. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Charging Party Tamayo

4 filed a charge with the Commission, alleging violations by Defendant of Title I of the ADA, as

5 amended. The Commission has issued a Letter of Determination finding reasonable cause to believe

6 that Defendant discriminated against Ms. Tamayo because of her disability and therefore violated the

7 ADA. Prior to instituting this lawsuit, the Commission attempted to eliminate the unlawful

8 employment practices alleged herein and to effect voluntary compliance with the ADA through

9 informal methods of conciliation, conference and persuasion within the meaning of Section 706(b)

10 of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §$2000e- (b) and 2000e-6. All conditions precedent to the institution of this

11 lawsuit have been fulfilled.

12

9. Since at least July of 2011, Defendant has engaged in unlawful employment practices

13 at its facility in Oakland, California in violation of Section 102(a) of Title I of the ADA, 42 U.S.C.

14 §12112(a), as amended, by, inter alia, failing to provide a reasonable accommodation to Ms.

15 Tamayo and subsequently discharging her because of her disability. Ms. Tamayo had breast cancer

16 which substantially limited her in the major life activity of cell reproduction. During her treatment

17 and recovery period, she could not perform the daily tasks of caring for herself because she was

18 weakened from her impairment and its treatment. She is currently in remission.

19

10. Defendant hired Ms. Tamayo as an Office Associate in its Endocrinology Department

20 in or around March 2009. At the time Ms. Tamayo was diagnosed with breast cancer in December

21 2011, she had been performing her duties satisfactorily. Ms. Tamayo’s disability required her to

22 seek a two month medical leave of absence in or around January 2012. Ms. Tamayo sought to

23 extend her medical leave three times to undergo treatment for her disability, including a double

24 mastectomy, reconstruction surgery for each breast and the removal of her fallopian tubes, ovaries

25 and uterus. On or about July 10, 2012, when Ms. Tamayo was in her sixth month of medical leave,

26 Defendant rejected Ms. Tamayo’s doctor’s medical certification, which stated that Ms. Tamayo was

27 still recuperating from surgery but could return to work without restrictions on September 1, 2012.

28 Defendant denied Ms. Tamayo any further medical leave and fired her based on its belief that she

COMPLAINT & JURY DEMAND

3

Case4:13-cv-05715-DMR Document1 Filed12/11/13 Page4 of 5

1 would not be able to return to work on September 1, 2012 and that Ms. Tamayo’s continued absence

2 would cause it undue business hardship. Defendant did not explore any alternative accommodations

3 with Ms. Tamayo, such as reassigning her to several vacant Office Associate positions elsewhere in

4 the hospital, for which it advertised in August and filled sometime in the fall of 2012.

5

11. The effect of the actions complained of in Paragraphs 9 and 10 above has been to

6 deprive Ms. Tamayo of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect her status as

7 an employee because of her disability.

8

12. The unlawful employment practices complained of in Paragraphs 9 and 10 above

9 were intentional.

10

13. The unlawful employment practices complained of in Paragraphs 9 and 10 above

11 were done with malice or reckless indifference to Ms. Tamayo’s federally protected rights.

12

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

13

Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:

14

A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its officers, agents, employees,

15 attorneys, successors, assigns, and all persons acting in concert or participation with Defendant, from

16 terminating the employment of an employee because of a disability, failing to reinstate or provide a

17 reasonable accommodation to an employee because of a disability, and engaging in any other

18 employment practice which discriminates against an employee on the basis of disability.

19

B. Order Defendant to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which

20 prohibit discrimination and eradicate the effects of their unlawful past and present employment

21 practices.

22

C. Order Defendant to make whole Charging Party Imelda Tamayo by providing

23 appropriate back pay and benefits with prejudgment interest in amounts to be determined at trial, and

24 other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices,

25 including but not limited to reinstatement and/or front pay.

26

D. Order Defendant to make whole Ms. Tamayo by providing compensation for past and

27 future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices complained of above,

28 including but not limited to out-of-pocket expenses necessitated by Defendant’s unlawful conduct, in

COMPLAINT & JURY DEMAND

4

Case4:13-cv-05715-DMR Document1 Filed12/11/13 Page5 of 5

1 amounts to be determined at trial.

2

E. Order Defendant to make whole Ms. Tamayo by providing compensation for past and

3 future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of above including,

4 but not limited to emotional pain and suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life and

5 humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial.

6

F. Order Defendant to pay Ms. Tamayo punitive damages for its malicious or reckless

7 conduct described above, in an amount to be determined at trial.

8

G. Grant such further relief as the Court may deem just and proper in the public interest.

9

H. Award the Commission its costs in this action.

10

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

11

The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its Complaint.

12

P. DAVID LOPEZ

General Counsel 13

JAMES LEE

14

Deputy General Counsel

15

GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS

Associate General Counsel 16

17 Date: December 11, 2013
18
19

By: /s/ William R. Tamayo WILLIAM R. TAMAYO Regional Attorney

20 Date: December 11, 2013 21 22
Date: December 11, 2013 23 24 25 26 27 28

By: /s/ Marcia Mitchell MARCIA MITCHELL Supervisory Trial Attorney
By: /s/ Debra A. Smith DEBRA A. SMITH Senior Trial Attorney
Attorneys for Plaintiff U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Phillip Burton Federal Building 450 Golden Gate Ave., 5th Floor West P.O. Box 36025 San Francisco, CA 94102

COMPLAINT & JURY DEMAND

5

 
 1 WILLIAM R. TAMAYO, SBN 084965 (CA) MARCIA L. MITCHELL, SBN 18122 (WA)
2 DEBRA A. SMITH, SBN 147863(CA) U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
3 Phillip Burton Federal Building San Francisco District Office
4 450 Golden Gate Ave, 5th Fl. West San Francisco, CA 94102
5 Telephone No. (415) 522-3034 Fax No. (415) 522-3425
6 Debra.Smith@eeoc.gov

7 Attorneys for Plaintiff EEOC

8 SARAH E. ROBERTSON #142439 MARK A. DELGADO #215618

9 DONAHUE FITZGERALD LLP 1999 Harrison Street, 25th Floor

10 Oakland, California 94612 Telephone: (510) 451-3300

11 Facsimile: (510) 451-1527 Email: srobertson@donahue.com

12

mdelgado@donahue.com

13 Attorneys for Defendant CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTER OAKLAND
14

15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17 U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY Case No.: CV 13-05715 EMC

18 COMMISSION,

19

Plaintiff,

CONSENT DECREE

20 vs.
21 CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH
22 CENTER,

23

Defendant.

24

25 INTRODUCTION
26 On December 11, 2013 Plaintiff United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
27 (EEOC) filed this action pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 as amended (ADA)
28

Consent Decree

1

1 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant, Children’s Hospital and

2 Research Center (Children’s Hospital), failed to provide reasonable accommodation – extended

3 medical leave-- for Imelda Tamayo and discharged her because of the extended medical leave

4 required to treat her disability.

5

In order to avoid the additional expense, delay, and uncertainty that would result from further

6 litigation of this lawsuit, the parties agree to the entry of this Consent Decree. By its agreement to

7 the entry of this Consent Decree, Defendant does not admit to the allegations made in the Complaint.

8

The Court has reviewed the terms of this Consent Decree in light of the pleadings, the record

9 herein, and the applicable law, and now approves this Consent Decree in its entirety.

10

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows:

11 I. GENERAL PROVISIONS

12

A. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties to this action.

13

B. This Consent Decree constitutes a full resolution of this case, EEOC v. CHILDREN’S

14 HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTER, Case CV 13-05715 EMC, U.S. District Court, Northern

15 District of California, and all allegations made in Plaintiff EEOC’s complaint.

16

C. This Consent Decree shall become effective upon its entry by the Court.

17

D. Each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees.

18

II. GENERAL INJUNCTIVE PROVISIONS AGAINST DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION

19

A. Defendant and its officers, agents, employees, successors, assigns, and all persons in

20 active concert or participation with it, are enjoined from: (a) unlawfully discriminating against any

21 employee due to his or her disability; or (b) retaliating against any employee because he or she: (i)

22 opposes or opposed any discriminatory act or practices made unlawful by the ADA; (ii) files or filed

23 a charge of discrimination or assists, assisted, participates, or participated in the filing of a charge of

24 discrimination; or (iii) assists, assisted, testified, participates or participated in an investigation

25 (including without limitation any internal investigation undertaken by Defendant) or proceeding

26 brought under the Federal laws prohibiting discrimination or retaliation. Consistent with 42 U.S.C.

27 §12203(b), Defendant shall not coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with any individual in the

28 exercise of enjoyment of, or on account of his or her having exercised or enjoyed, or on account of

Consent Decree

2

1 his or her having aided or encouraged any other individual in the exercise or enjoyment of, any right

2 granted or protected by the ADA.

3

B. Defendant shall make reasonable accommodations for disabled employees as required by

4 law, including providing medical leave up to and beyond sixty (60) days for employees whose

5 medical providers have determined that their disability or disabling condition requires the requested

6 additional leave to recover. Upon request, Defendant shall provide such extended leave through the

7 date on the disabled employee’s medical certification unless Defendant can demonstrate, by the

8 factors set forth in 29 C.F.R. §1630.2(p), that covering the disabled employee’s position and job

9 duties constitutes undue hardship, as defined by 42 U.S.C. §12112.

10 III. SPECIFIC INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

11

A. Revising EEO Policies

12

Defendant shall revise its personnel policies, as necessary, to include the following:

13

1. Policy E05: ADA AND FEHA COMPLIANCE

14

a. Policy E05, section III.C. will be revised to state: “Individual

15 accommodations may include revised procedures, personal assistance, adapted workplaces and

16 devices, an extended leave of absence, and job restructuring which permits the individual to perform
17 the essential functions of the job.”
b. Policy E05, section III.D.4.a. will be revised to add the following sentence: 18
“When Children’s determines, after an interactive process that there are no reasonable 19
accommodations that would enable the employee to return to his or her current position, the HR 20
Generalist-ADA/LOA will determine whether the employee can be accommodated through 21
reassignment, by informing the employee about the possibility of reassignment and for those 22
employees interested in reassignment, determining whether the employee can be placed in an 23
alternative position without imposing an undue hardship.” 24
c. Policy E05, section IV.A., will be revised to add subsection 1, as follows: 25
“1. An employee who needs a leave of absence shall notify his or her manager and/or Human 26
Resources, who will inform the employee as to how to contact Matrix (the outside company that 27
handles administration of leaves of absence). Generally speaking, approval of requests for 28

Consent Decree

3

1 continuous leaves of absence of shorter than six months for non-industrial injury/illness or one year

2 for industrial injury/illness will be done by Matrix and need not be the subject of the interactive

3 process. If a leave of absence extends beyond six months for non-industrial injury/illness or one

4 year for industrial injury/illness, the employee may request additional time off as a reasonable

5 accommodation. To request an accommodation, employees should contact the HR Generalist-

6 ADA/LOA in the Human Resources Department.” The existing language in Policy E05, section IV.

7 A. will now be subsection 2. of that same section.

8

d. Policy E05, section IV.E. will be revised to add the following sentence: “If

9 there is a question as to whether the necessary accommodation creates an undue hardship, the

10 determination is made by the Senior Director of Human Resources and the Vice President of

11 Professional Support Services, in writing, including the reasons supporting their decision before the

12 interactive process is completed so that the employee is able to consider and/or propose less

13 burdensome alternative accommodations.”

14

e. Policy E05, section IV.H., second sentence, will be revised to state: “The

15 Manager will remain responsible for checking with the employee within three (3) months of the

16 accommodation being implemented and at least every six (6) months thereafter or sooner, depending
17 on the nature of the accommodation, to ensure that the accommodations are and/or remain effective
and notify the HR Generalist-ADA/LOA of his/her determination.” 18
f. Policy E05, section IV.J., will be revised to state: “Complaints must 19
normally be submitted to HR within thirty (30) days of the date the person filing the complaint did or 20
should have become aware of the alleged discriminatory action to ensure that Children’s can take 21
corrective action, if necessary, as soon as possible. However, a Complaint submitted beyond the 22
thirty (30) day period will be investigated by HR.” 23
g. Policy E05, section IV.K. will be revised to state: “A complaint may be 24
made verbally to HR or in writing and must state the problem or action alleged to be discriminatory 25
and the remedy or relief sought by the claimant. If made verbally, HR will memorialize the 26
complaint in writing.” 27
h. Policy E05, section IV.P. will be revised to state: “Use of this Children’s 28

Consent Decree

4

1 procedure does not preclude a person from filing a complaint of discrimination on the basis of

2 disability with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the California Department of

3 Fair Employment and Housing, or other applicable government agency at any time prior to or after

4 the filing of an internal complaint.”

5

2. Policy H05: FITNESS TO WORK ASSESSMENT AND WORK

6 RESTRICTION

7

a. Policy H05 will be revised to state: “When an employee is temporarily not

8 able to perform his/her assigned duties fully but is willing and able to perform the essential functions

9 of the job, the manager is expected to confer with the person needing the accommodation or refer the

10 employee to the HR Generalist-ADA/LOA regarding available and appropriate reasonable

11 accommodations and will provide such accommodations if the accommodation does not create

12 undue hardship on the department and/or Hospital. In general, an accommodation may be

13 considered an undue hardship if it is unduly costly, extensive, substantial, disruptive, or would

14 fundamentally change the essential functions of the job. Undue hardship is determined on a case-by-

15 case basis. See Policy E05 ADA and FEHA Compliance. ”

16

b. Policy H05 paragraph 3 will be revised to state: “Reasonable

17 accommodation may be in the form of reduced workload, reduced or modified work hours,

alternative work assignments or short or extended leaves of absence based on the recommendation of 18

the employee’s medical provider. For more information regarding different types of 19

accommodations, see Policy E05, section III.C. and D.” 20

c. Policy H05 paragraph 4, bullet point one, setting forth a fixed period for 21
accommodations, will be deleted. 22
The last sentence of paragraph 4 will be revised to state: “Furthermore, managers must 23
ensure that the employee’s ability to perform his/her job with or without accommodation has been 24
assessed by Employee Health and/or the HR Generalist-ADA/LOA and either clearance given or a 25
reasonable accommodation provided by HR, prior to resuming work.” 26
d. Policy H05 paragraph 5, second sentence will be revised to state: 27
“Regardless of the origin, Employee Health screens, validates and approves all work restrictions.”
28

Consent Decree

5

1

e. Policy H05 paragraph 6 will be revised to state: “Employees who are

2 denied clearance to return to work by Employee Health have the right to consult with the HR

3 Generalist – ADA/LOA to ensure that reasonable accommodations have been considered and that

4 none are available.”

5

f. Policy H05 paragraph 7, fourth and fifth sentences will be revised to state:

6 “Upon completion of the evaluation, Employee Health informs the employee’s manager if the

7 employee is capable of performing his/her job, able to work but may require certain restrictions or a

8 reasonable accommodation as determined by the HR Generalist-ADA/LOA, or incapable of

9 performing the assigned duties temporarily or permanently. Based upon these findings, the manager

10 is responsible for determining an appropriate course of action in conjunction with Employee Health

11 and the HR Generalist-ADA/LOA (e.g., an assistive device or a reasonable accommodation)

12 utilizing the interactive process whenever a reasonable accommodation is part of the evaluative

13 process.”

14

g. Policy H05 paragraph 8, first sentence will be revised to state: “When an

15 employee has a work restriction or has a disability that limits the performance of the essential

16 functions of his/her assigned job, a decision regarding a reasonable accommodation will be made on
17 a case-by-case basis by the manager, Employee Health and/or the HR Generalist-ADA/LOA using
the interactive process as described in HR Policy. E05: “ADA and FEHA Compliance.” The 18
following sentence will be added after the second sentence: “In general, an accommodation may be 19
considered an undue hardship if it is unduly costly, extensive, substantial, disruptive, or would 20
fundamentally change the essential functions of the job.” The following sentence will be added as 21
the last sentence in this paragraph: “With respect to determining whether reassignment is a 22
reasonable accommodation, the interactive process will include, as necessary, consultation with the 23
Unions to determine whether reassignment is feasible without undue hardship.” 24
3. HR Policy L02: Leaves of Absence 25
a. HR Policy L02, section III.B. (Medical Disability Leave), paragraph 2 will 26
be revised to state: “If an employee’s medical provider indicates that he or she will need an 27
extended leave of absence in excess of six months, Children’s will either grant the extension or 28

Consent Decree

6

1 notify the employee of the interactive process required by the ADA and begin the interactive process

2 within fifteen (15) business days. The HR Generalist-ADA/LOA will work with the employee and

3 his/her medical provider or Employee Health, if necessary, to determine reasonable accommodations

4 available as set forth in Policy E05 ADA and FEHA Compliance.”

5

b. Policy L02, section III.C. (Pregnancy Disability Leave), paragraph 2 will

6 be revised to state: “The maximum time off allowed for a pregnancy, without complications, is 7

7 months, which includes 4 months of Pregnancy Disability Leave followed by 12 workweeks of

8 CFRA leave. Nevertheless, an employee may be entitled to additional medical leave if a pregnancy-

9 related condition qualifies as a disability under the ADA.”

10

4. Defendant submitted these proposed policies to the EEOC for its review and

11 comments prior to Defendant’s presentation of the revised policies to its Board for approval. The

12 EEOC provided its response the following day. On December 12, 2014, Defendant’s Board of

13 Directors approved the requisite policies.

14

5. The policy language stated above within these policies shall not be revised during

15 the duration of this Decree without first obtaining consent from the EEOC and providing the EEOC

16 an opportunity to review and comment on any proposed revisions related to the ADA. It shall not be
17 a violation of this Decree to change other language within Children’s policies or to change the
numbering of the sections within the policies affected by this Decree. 18
B. Notifying Employees 19
Within sixty (60) days after the entry of this Consent Decree, Defendant will send a letter to 20
all of its employees advising them of their rights under the ADA and informing them how to request 21
a reasonable accommodation. Defendant will provide a copy of this letter to the EEOC for review 22
and consideration at least thirty (30) days before dissemination it to its employees, as required by 23
Section VI.A. below. Plaintiff will provide its comments within seven (7) days. 24
C. Training of Employees 25
Defendant shall revise its on-line employee compliance training program to create an on-line 26
ADA training module that includes instruction on issues related to discrimination based on 27
disability, including Defendant’s duty to provide reasonable accommodation with specific examples 28

Consent Decree

7

1 of how the interactive process should work; a discussion of the various types of reasonable

2 accommodations Defendant makes available to its employees, including scenarios providing

3 extended leave of absence and reassignment to a vacant position as reasonable accommodations;

4 how to complain internally if the employee believes he or she is being discriminated against because

5 of his or her disability; that retaliation for requesting an accommodation or complaining about the

6 accommodation provided violates the ADA and will not be tolerated by Defendant; and that the

7 employee has the right to file a complaint with an outside agency such as the EEOC or DFEH.

8

1. Defendant shall submit its on-line ADA training module for employees to the

9 EEOC for its review and comments no later than ninety (90) days after entry of this Decree, as

10 required by Section VI.C. below. The EEOC will provide feedback to Defendant within fourteen

11 (14) days of receipt of the on-line ADA training module.

12

2. Defendant will provide a live, ten-minute summary of the content from its on-line

13 ADA training module to new employees during its regularly scheduled orientation program for new

14 employees and new employees will thereafter review the on-line ADA training module. Existing

15 employees will be required to take the on-line ADA training module within nine (9) months of the

16 entry of this Decree, unless they are on a leave of absence or otherwise unavailable to complete the
17 training. Should an existing employee be unable to complete this mandatory training, Defendant will
arrange an alternative time for the employee to review the on-line ADA training module upon his 18
return to work and provide documentation of this alternative viewing to the EEOC as part of its 19
reporting obligations as set in the next paragraph. 20
3. Within nine (9) months after entry of this Decree, and every six (6) months 21
thereafter for the duration of this Decree, Defendant will provide EEOC with a listing of each date 22
Defendant held a new employee orientation program and the number of employees who participated 23
in Defendant’s on-line ADA training module, as required by Section VI.D. below. 24
4. This on-line ADA training module shall not be revised during the duration of this 25
Decree without first obtaining consent from the EEOC and providing the EEOC an opportunity to 26
review and comment on any proposed revisions related to the ADA. 27
D. Training of Managers 28

Consent Decree

8

1

Defendant shall provide one round of mandatory in-person training for its managers on

2 reasonable accommodation of disabilities. The purpose of the training will be to give participants a

3 thorough understanding of discrimination issues, including but not limited to theories of liability

4 under the ADA, including for retaliation, the duty to provide reasonable accommodation with

5 specific examples of how the interactive process should work, how to handle requests for

6 accommodation, and the employer’s obligation to take preventive, investigative, and remedial action

7 with respect to discrimination complaints, and to review company policies (including discipline

8 policies) and practices related to discrimination, accommodation, and retaliation. The training will

9 further inform each participant that he or she is responsible for knowing and complying with the

10 reasonable accommodation provisions contained in HR Policy E05 on ADA and FEHA compliance

11 and may be disciplined for non-compliance with that policy.

12

1. Defendant shall submit its training program for managers to the EEOC for its

13 review and comments no later than ninety (90) days after entry of this Decree, as required by Section

14 VI.C. The EEOC will provide feedback to Defendant within fourteen (14) days of receipt of the

15 revised employee training program.

16

2. Within nine (9) months after the entry of this Decree, Defendant shall provide this

17 mandatory training for its managers. Thereafter during the term of this Decree, managers will be

required annually to take the ADA training offered to all employees. 18

3. All persons attending each mandatory ADA training shall sign an 19

acknowledgment of his or her attendance at the training, the date thereof, and his or her position with 20
the company. Defendant shall provide a copy of these acknowledgements to the EEOC within ten 21
(10) months after the first such training during the first year of the Consent Decree and no later than 22
thirty (30) days after each subsequent mandatory training throughout the duration of the Decree, as 23
required by paragraph VI.F. below. 24
E. Promoting Supervisor Accountability 25

26

Managers in HR and Employee Health will be directed to bring any concerns about a

27 supervisor’s handling of the accommodation process to the Senior Director, Human Resources, who

28 will work with appropriate managers to ensure compliance with this Decree and the policies on

Consent Decree

9

1 accommodation of disabilities. As noted above, supervisors may be disciplined if they do not

2 comply with the reasonable accommodation provisions contained in HR Policy E05 on ADA and

3 FEHA compliance.

4

F. Disclosing Information , Revising Basis for Termination and Expunging Records

Regarding Charging Party’s Employment

5

Defendant will provide a neutral reference for Imelda Tamayo when requested by either Ms.

6 Tamayo or employers with whom she has applied, whether the reference is verbal over the telephone

7 or in writing. The reference should include her job title and a brief description of her job duties, her

8 dates of employment, and her starting and ending rate of pay. Defendant shall not disclose in any

9 way to any potential employer the fact that Ms. Tamayo filed two charges of discrimination and

10 participated in a lawsuit against Defendant.

11 1. Within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Decree, Defendant shall also provide Ms.

12 Tamayo with a letter including her job title and a brief description of her job duties, her dates of

13 employment, and her starting and ending rate of pay and the fact that she is eligible for rehire on

14 letterhead addressed “To Whom It May Concern” and undated so that Ms. Tamayo is able to make

15 multiple copies of this neutral recommendation.

16

2. Defendant should keep a record of any references provided directly to employers,

17 including the date the reference was requested, the name of the employer requesting the reference,

18 the date the reference was given, the person who provided the reference and whether it was provided

19 in writing or by telephone. Defendant shall provide a copy of this record to the EEOC within nine

20 (9) months of the entry of this Consent Decree and every six (6) months thereafter for the duration of

21 the Decree, as required by Section VI.E. below.

22

3. Within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Decree, Defendant shall remove from Ms.

23 Tamayo’s personnel file any notice that indicates that she is not eligible for rehire and any other

24 references to her charges of discrimination against the Company and/or to this lawsuit, and shall

25 retain such documents, if any, in sealed files separate and apart from all other personnel files.

26

4. Within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Decree, Defendant shall recharacterize Ms.

27 Tamayo’s reason for termination from “termination due to medical leave” to “resignation” so that

28 Ms. Tamayo does not need to disclose the fact that she was disabled to future employers during the

Consent Decree

10

1 recruitment and hiring process.

2 IV. MONETARY RELIEF

3

A. Defendant will cause to be paid to Imelda Tamayo a check in the amount of $300,000.00

4 (Three hundred thousand dollars and no cents) in full settlement of the discrimination claims in this

5 lawsuit and the charge of discrimination she filed with the EEOC. The payment will be reported on

6 an IRS Form 1099.

7

B. Defendant will not condition the receipt of individual relief on Ms. Tamayo’s agreement

8 to (a) maintain as confidential the terms of this decree, (b) waive her statutory right to file a charge

9 with any federal or state anti-discrimination agency, (c) release her rights under any law other than

10 the ADA, or (d) waive her right to apply for a position with the Defendant.

11

C. Defendant shall cause this payment and the IRS Form 1099 to be sent directly to Imelda

12 Tamayo by certified mail, return receipt requested, to an address specified by the EEOC. The

13 payment will be made within twenty (20) days of the entry of this Consent Decree. Defendant and

14 will send a copy of the check within three (3) days after it is mailed to Counsel for Plaintiff EEOC.

15 V. NOTICE

16

A. Within sixty (60) days after entry of this Decree, Defendant shall post for the duration of

17 this Decree, in a prominent place frequented by its employees at its facilities, the notice attached as

Exhibit A. The notice shall be the same type, style, and size as Exhibit A. Defendant shall certify to 18
the EEOC in writing that the Notice has been posted and the location of the posting within ten (10) 19
days of it being posted, as required by Section VI.B. below. 20
VI. COMPLIANCE AND REPORTING 21
A. Within sixty (60) days of the entry of this Consent Decree, Defendant will provide the 22
EEOC with a copy of the letter advising its employees of their rights under the ADA as required by
23 Section III.B. above.
24 B. Within seventy (70) days of the entry of this Consent Decree, Defendant will provide
25 notice to the EEOC that it has posted Exhibit A and the location of the posting, as required by

26 Section V. above.

27 C. Within ninety (90) days of the entry of this Consent Decree, Defendant will provide

28

Consent Decree

11

1 the following documents to the EEOC: 1) a copy of its on-line ADA training module for employees,

2 as required by Section III.C.1. above, and 2) a copy of its ADA training program for managers for

3 managers, as required by Section III.D.1. above.

4

D. Within nine (9) months of the entry of this Decree, and every six (6) months

5 thereafter for the duration of this Decree, Defendant will provide the EEOC with a listing of each

6 date Defendant held a new employee orientation program and the number of employees who

7 participated in Defendant’s on-line ADA training module for employees, as required by Section

8 III.C.3. above.

9

E. Within nine (9) months of the entry of this Consent Decree, and every six (6) months

10 thereafter, Defendant will provide the EEOC a copy of the record of employer referrals for Imelda

11 Tamayo, as required by Section III.F.2. above.

12

F. Within ten (10) months of the entry of this Consent Decree, and no later than thirty

13 days thirty (30) days after Defendant provides its mandatory in-person ADA training program for

14 managers, Defendant will provide to the EEOC copies of the acknowledgments of attendance signed

15 by the managers in attendance at these trainings, as required by Section III.D.3. above.

16

G. Within one (1) year after the entry of this Consent Decree, and every six (6) months

17 thereafter until the expiration of the decree, Defendant will provide to counsel for the EEOC a report

containing a summary of all requests for reasonable accommodation of disabilities received by 18

Human Resources from employees and employment applicants. This summary shall contain the date 19

of the request, a brief description of each request for accommodation, and a statement as to each as 20

to the response and resolution of such request. For requests for accommodations, the summary shall 21
include a description of the accommodation sought, any alternative accommodations offered and, if 22
the request was denied, an explanation as to the reasons for the denial. In the case of the denial of a 23
requested accommodation during the first reporting period pursuant to this paragraph, Defendant 24
shall also provide copies of the documents generated as part of the request and Defendant’s 25
resolution of such request. During subsequent reporting periods, Defendant need only provide 26
copies of the documents related to Defendant’s denial of a requested accommodation if requested to 27
do so by the EEOC.
28

Consent Decree

12

1

H. All documents or information required to be submitted by Defendant to the EEOC

2 under the terms of this Consent Decree shall be sent to Debra A. Smith, Trial Attorney, EEOC, 450

3 Golden Gate Ave., 5th Floor West, P. O. Box 36025, San Francisco, CA 94102.

4 VI. EXPIRATION OF CONSENT DECREE AND CONTINUED JURISDICTION

5

A. This Consent Decree shall expire three (3) years after its entry by the Court.

6

B. If Plaintiff EEOC determines that Defendant has not complied with the Consent Decree,

7 it will provide written notification of the alleged breach to Defendant and will not petition the Court

8 for enforcement sooner than sixty (60) days after providing written notification. The sixty-day

9 period following written notice shall be used by the parties for good faith efforts to resolve the issue.

10 If Plaintiff petitions the Court and the Court finds Defendant to be in substantial violation of the

11 terms of the Decree, the Court may extend this Consent Decree.

12

C. This Court shall retain jurisdiction over this action for the purposes of enforcing the

13 provisions of this Consent Decree.

14 15 On behalf of Plaintiff:

On behalf of Defendant:

16

/s/ Debra A. Smith

/s/ Sarah E. Robertson_______

17 WILLIAM R. TAMAYO

18

Regional Attorney EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

19 OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

SARAH ROBERTSON ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT

20

MARCIA MITCHELL Supervisory Trial Attorney

21

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

22 DEBRA A. SMITH Trial Attorney
23 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
24

TATES DISTRICT C IT IS SO ORDERED

UNITED S ALIFORNIA

OURT NORTH

25 IT IS SO ORDERED:

February, 2015

26 Executed this _1_0_day of

2014.

27

28

Judge Edward M. Chen
UnEEiRtDeNdWSDAtaRIteSDsTDMRi.stICrCiHctTECNOouFrtC

____

Consent Decree

13

NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES 1
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), on behalf of Imelda 2
Tamayo, and Children’s Hospital and Research Center (Children’s Hospital) have successfully 3
resolved a disability discrimination and retaliation lawsuit (EEOC v. Children’s Hospital, No. C134
05715 EMC)(N.D.CA). Judge Edward Chen approved the Consent Decree and this Notice. 5
The American With Disabilities Act (ADA) makes it unlawful for any covered employer to 6
discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of a disability, subject them 7
to harassment because of their disability, or retaliate against anyone who complains of 8
discriminatory practices or who participates in the investigation of a complaint or charge of 9
discriminatory practices. The ADA also requires an employer to provide a reasonable 10
accommodation to assist a qualified individual perform the essential duties of his or her job unless 11
providing the accommodation would cause the employer undue hardship. 12
Children’s Hospital respects the right of its employees and applicants for employment to 13
work in an environment free from discrimination and affirms the following "Statement of Zero14
Tolerance Policy and Equality Objectives": Children’s Hospital is committed to maintaining a zero15
tolerance policy concerning unlawful discrimination, harassment and retaliation, to swiftly 16
responding to any such acts of which it becomes aware; to imposing appropriate discipline designed 17
to deter future acts of discrimination, harassment or retaliation; and to actively monitoring its 18
workplace to ensure tolerance, respect and dignity for all employees. 19
Any employee who feels that he or she has been the subject of discrimination, harassment or 20
retaliation should bring it immediately to the attention of his or her supervisor or to the Human 21
Resources Manager. No Company official will retaliate against an employee who makes an internal 22
complaint of discrimination or who contacts the EEOC or its state counterpart. 23
The EEOC enforces the federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. More 24
information about the EEOC is available at www.eeoc.gov or (800) 669-4000. The nearest EEOC 25
office is in Oakland at 1301 Clay Street, Suite 1170-N. 26

27 DATED: 28

[Job Title], Children’s Hospital

Consent Decree

14

 
 Case: 3:13-cv-5715 As of: 11/14/2017 01:22 PM PST 1 of 4
ADRMOP,CLOSED,MEDTERM,PRVADR
U.S. District Court California Northern District (San Francisco) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:13−cv−05715−EMC

US Equal Employment Oppurtunity Commission v. Children's Hospital & Research Center Assigned to: Hon. Edward M. Chen Cause: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 12/11/2013 Date Terminated: 02/10/2015 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 445 American with Disabilities − Employment Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

US Equal Employment Oppurtunity Commission

represented by Debra A. Smith Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 450 Golden Gate Ave POB 36025 San Francisco, CA 94102 415−522−3425 Email: debra.smith@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Children's Hospital & Research Center

represented by Sarah Elizabeth Robertson Donahue Fitzgerald LLP 1999 Harrison Street 25th Floor Oakland, CA 94612−1837 510−451−3300 Email: srobertson@donahue.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark A. Delgado Donahue Fitzgerald LLP 1999 Harrison Street 25th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 510−451−3300 Fax: 510−451−1527 Email: mdelgado@donahue.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 12/11/2013
12/11/2013 12/11/2013

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT (with jury demand) (Civil Rights − Employment Discrimination) against Children's Hospital & Research Center. Filed by US Equal Employment Oppurtunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Smith, Debra) (Filed on 12/11/2013) Modified on 12/11/2013 (cjl, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 12/11/2013)
2 Proposed Summons. (Smith, Debra) (Filed on 12/11/2013) (Entered: 12/11/2013)
3 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu.
Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E−Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.

Case: 3:13-cv-5715 As of: 11/14/2017 01:22 PM PST 2 of 4

12/11/2013 12/11/2013 01/07/2014 01/21/2014 03/04/2014 03/05/2014 03/06/2014 03/21/2014 04/29/2014
04/29/2014 04/29/2014 05/14/2014 05/23/2014
05/23/2014

Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. Counsel is required to send chambers a copy of the initiating documents pursuant to L.R. 5−1(e)(7). A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. (ha, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/11/2013) (Entered: 12/11/2013)
4 ADR SCHEDULING ORDER: Case Management Statement due by 3/5/2014. Case Management Conference set for 3/12/2014 01:30 PM in Courtroom 4, 3rd Floor, Oakland. (cjl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/11/2013) (Entered: 12/11/2013)
5 Summons Issued as to Children's Hospital & Research Center. (cjl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/11/2013) (Entered: 12/11/2013)
6 CLERK'S NOTICE Re: Consent or Declination: Plaintiff shall file a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate judge within 14 days of this notice. (This is a text only docket entry, there is no document associated with this notice.) (ig, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/7/2014) (Entered: 01/07/2014)
7 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by US Equal Employment Oppurtunity Commission.. (Smith, Debra) (Filed on 1/21/2014) (Entered: 01/21/2014)
8 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Children's Hospital & Research Center.. (Robertson, Sarah) (Filed on 3/4/2014) (Entered: 03/04/2014)
9 CLERK'S NOTICE of Impending Reassignment to U.S. District Judge (ig, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/5/2014) (Entered: 03/05/2014)
10 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Hon. Edward M. Chen for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu no longer assigned to the case. Signed by the Executive Committee on March 06, 2014. (cjlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/6/2014) (Entered: 03/06/2014)
11 ANSWER to Complaint byChildren's Hospital & Research Center. (Robertson, Sarah) (Filed on 3/21/2014) (Entered: 03/21/2014)
12 CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER: Case Management Statement due by 5/15/2014. Case Management Conference set for 5/22/2014 09:00 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 4/29/14. (Attachments: # 1 Standing Order)(bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/29/2014) (Entered: 04/29/2014)
13 CLERKS NOTICE − LETTER FROM JUDGE CHEN RE: CONSENT BEFORE MAGISTRATE JUDGE (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/29/2014) (Entered: 04/29/2014)
14 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by US Equal Employment Oppurtunity Commission re 12 Case Management Scheduling Order, with Standing Orders (Smith, Debra) (Filed on 4/29/2014) (Entered: 04/29/2014)
15 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT (JOINT) & Proposed Order filed by Children's Hospital & Research Center. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(Delgado, Mark) (Filed on 5/14/2014) (Entered: 05/14/2014)
16 Minute Entry: Initial Case Management Conference held on 5/22/2014 before Judge Edward M. Chen (Date Filed: 5/23/2014), Case referred to mediation. Status Report due by 9/4/2014. Status Conference set for 9/11/2014 10:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen. (Recording #FTR 9:13−9:19.) (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 5/23/2014) (Entered: 05/23/2014)
17 CASE MANAGEMENT SCHEDULING ORDER: Discovery due by 3/19/2015. 7−day Jury Trial set for 9/21/2015 08:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen. Motion Hearing set for 6/11/2015 01:30 PM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen. Pretrial Conference set for 8/25/2015 02:30 PM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San

Case: 3:13-cv-5715 As of: 11/14/2017 01:22 PM PST 3 of 4

06/30/2014 07/01/2014 07/25/2014 08/14/2014 08/18/2014 09/08/2014
09/09/2014 09/12/2014
11/13/2014 11/20/2014
12/12/2014 12/22/2014
01/22/2015

Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen. Jury Trial set for 9/22/2015 08:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen. Jury Trial set for 9/23/2015 08:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen. Jury Trial set for 9/25/2015 08:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen. Jury Trial set for 9/28/2015 08:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen. Jury Trial set for 9/29/2015 08:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen. Jury Trial set for 9/30/2015 08:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen. Jury Selection set for 9/21/2015 08:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 5/23/14. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/23/2014) (Entered: 05/23/2014)
18 NOTICE of Change of Address by Sarah Elizabeth Robertson and Change of Firm Name (Robertson, Sarah) (Filed on 6/30/2014) (Entered: 06/30/2014)
19 ADR Clerks Notice Appointing Jody I. LeWitter as Mediator. (af, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/1/2014) (Entered: 07/01/2014)
20 ADR Clerks Notice Vacating Appointment of Mediator, Jody LeWitter 19 . The ADR Program will appoint another mediator as soon as possible. (af, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/25/2014) (Entered: 07/25/2014)
21 STIPULATION and Proposed Order selecting Private ADR by Children's Hospital & Research Center and EEOC filed by Children's Hospital & Research Center. (Robertson, Sarah) (Filed on 8/14/2014) (Entered: 08/14/2014)
22 Order by Hon. Edward M. Chen granting 21 Stipulation selecting Private ADR.(knm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/18/2014) (Entered: 08/18/2014)
23 CLERK'S NOTICE − Status conference is set for 9/11/14 at 10:30 a.m. An updated joint status report was due 9/4/14. Joint Status report shall be filed by noon on 9/9/14.THIS IS A TEXT ONLY DOCKET ENTRY; THERE IS NO DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS NOTICE. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/8/2014) (Entered: 09/08/2014)
24 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT (UPDATED) filed by Children's Hospital & Research Center. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(Robertson, Sarah) (Filed on 9/9/2014) (Entered: 09/09/2014)
25 Minute Entry: Status Conference held 9/11/14. (Date Filed: 9/12/2014). Status Report due by 11/13/2014. Further Status Conference set for 11/20/2014 10:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen. (Recording #FTR 10:34−10:47.) (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 9/12/2014) (Entered: 09/12/2014)
26 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT filed by US Equal Employment Oppurtunity Commission. (Smith, Debra) (Filed on 11/13/2014) (Entered: 11/13/2014)
27 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. Edward M. Chen: Status Conference held on 11/20/2014. Status Report due by 12/11/2014. Status Conference set for 12/18/2014 10:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen.(FTR Time 10:55 − 10:59 a.m.) (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 11/21/2014)
28 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT filed by US Equal Employment Oppurtunity Commission. (Smith, Debra) (Filed on 12/12/2014) (Entered: 12/12/2014)
29 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. Edward M. Chen: Status Conference held on 12/18/14. Status Report due by 1/22/2015. Status Conference set for 1/29/2015 10:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen.Court Reporter Name or FTR Time 10:50−10:58. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 12/22/2014) (Entered: 12/22/2014)
30 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT JOINT UPDATED filed by US Equal Employment Oppurtunity Commission. (Smith, Debra) (Filed on 1/22/2015) (Entered: 01/22/2015)

Case: 3:13-cv-5715 As of: 11/14/2017 01:22 PM PST 4 of 4

01/22/2015 01/30/2015
02/04/2015
02/05/2015 02/06/2015 02/10/2015 02/10/2015

31 AFFIDAVIT re 30 Case Management Statement Smith by US Equal Employment Oppurtunity Commission. (Smith, Debra) (Filed on 1/22/2015) (Entered: 01/22/2015)
32 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. Edward M. Chen: Status Conference held on 1/29/2015. Discovery due by 4/16/2015. Status Report due by 2/5/2015. Status Conference set for 2/12/2015 10:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen.Court Reporter Name or FTR Time 11:40−11:48. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 1/30/2015) (Entered: 01/30/2015)
33 CLERK'S NOTICE resetting Status Conference for 2/12/2015 at 10:00 AM (instead of 10:30 a.m.) in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Edward M. Chen. Status Report due by 2/5/2015. THIS IS A TEXT ONLY DOCKET ENTRY; THERE IS NO DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS NOTICE. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/4/2015) (Entered: 02/04/2015)
34 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT filed by Children's Hospital & Research Center. (Robertson, Sarah) (Filed on 2/5/2015) (Entered: 02/05/2015)
35 Proposed Order Consent Decree by Children's Hospital & Research Center. (Robertson, Sarah) (Filed on 2/6/2015) (Entered: 02/06/2015)
36 ORDER − Consent Decree 35 Proposed Order filed by Children's Hospital & Research Center. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 2/10/15. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/10/2015) (Entered: 02/10/2015)
37 CLERK'S NOTICE vacating 2/12/15 and all other deadlines. Case is closed. THIS IS A TEXT ONLY DOCKET ENTRY; THERE IS NO DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS NOTICE. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/10/2015) (Entered: 02/10/2015)

 
 U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
PRESS RELEASE 12-11-13
Oakland Children's Hospital Sued by EEOC for Disability Discrimination
Medical Center Fired Employee with Breast Cancer, Federal Agency Charged
OAKLAND, Calif. - An Oakland-based non-profit regional medical center violated federal law when it failed to accommodate and instead fired an office associate diagnosed with breast cancer, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it filed today.
According to the EEOC's suit, Imelda Tamayo had worked as an office associate for Children's Hospital and Research Center for two years when she received her diagnosis of breast cancer in December 2011. The EEOC says Children's Hospital refused Tamayo's request for additional medical leave and unlawfully discharged her on July 10, 2012. The EEOC determined that accommodating Tamayo's request would not have posed an undue hardship for the medical center.
"It was devastating to lose my job due to my breast cancer," Tamayo said. "I lost not only my living but also my health insurance. I had hoped that an employer like Children's Hospital, whose aim is to heal children with serious diseases and conditions, would show understanding while I was undergoing treatment for my disability."
Treating a qualified employee unfavorably because of a disability violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The law also requires an employer to provide reasonable accommodation to an employee or job applicant with a disability, unless doing so would cause significant difficulty or expense for the employer. After attempting to resolve the case through pre-litigation conciliation efforts, the EEOC filed the lawsuit (EEOC v. Children's Hospital and Medical Center, Case No. CV 13-5715) in the Oakland Division of U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California and seeks monetary damages, including back pay, compensation for emotional distress and punitive damages on behalf of Tamayo, as well as an injunction to prevent further discrimination.
EEOC San Francisco Regional Attorney William R. Tamayo (no relation to the discrimination victim) said, "Firing employees with disabilities just because they may need more medical leave than dictated by company policy violates federal law. The law requires employers to engage in an interactive process to determine what accommodations would be reasonable under the circumstances. The EEOC's investigation showed that Children's Hospital failed to do that; now it must face the consequences."
EEOC San Francisco District Office Director Michael Baldonado said that according to the U.S. Center for Disease Control, 211,731 women in the United States were diagnosed with breast cancer in 2009.
"That number encompasses a wide number of individuals and range of circumstances, and the ADA is there to ensure that capable and qualified people like Ms. Tamayo are not denied the opportunity to contribute their talents to the workforce," Baldonado said.
Children's Hospital and Research Center is a non-profit organization with 30 medical specialties, over 200 doctors, and 2,500 employees at multiple sites in Oakland and the surrounding area.
The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Further information about the EEOC is available on its web site at www.eeoc.gov.