- Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL

Document 1

Filed 06/30/2004

Page 1 of 6

-«-I
Z
-(,!)
-~
0

Anna Y. Park, CA SBN 164242

Samantha E. Blake, CA SBN 169133

2 U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 3 255 East Temple Street, 4th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90012

BY
--;-D[PUTY

4 Telephone: (213) 894-1062 Facsimile: (213) 894-1301

CV-S-04-0907!LDG_PAL

5

; Attorneys for Plaintiff

6 I U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

, OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

9

10 U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 11 OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

12

Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

WESTERN CASEWORK CORPORAnON,

15

Defendant.

16

) DOCKET NO. CV-S·~~ ) ) COMPLAINT-CIVIL RIGHTS ). NATIONAL ORIGIN ) HARASSMENT ). NATIONAL ORIGIN DISPARATE ) PAY
) ) ) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
)

17

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

18

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

19 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Sections 706(t)(l) and (3)

20 and 707 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(f)(l)

21 and (3) 2000e-6 ("Title VII"), and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42U.S.C. §

22 1981a. This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil

23 . Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basi.s ofnationl1 origin

24 ' (Hispanic), and to provide appropriate relief to Miguel Bazan, Juan Carlos Bello, MimUi~1 Bello-

25 Monjaras, Claudio Marchi, Octavio Mendoza, and Oscar Pereyra, and a class of similarly

26 . situated individuals, who were adversely affected by such practices. Plaintiff U.S. Equal

27 I Employment Opportunity Commission ("Commission" or "EEOC") alleges that th{' individuals

-1-

\

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 1 Filed 06/30/2004 Page 2 of 6
... 'r'O"",,,,.
'.~'
..."",c",..
~,,'>.
e )....~.w~
. '"~""""'~
.~...,"'..'.,.J.
o

- Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL

Document 1

Filed 06/30/2004

Page 3 of 6

1 named above and a class of similarly situated individuals were harassed by superviiors and

2 coworkers on the basis of their national origin (Hispanic).

3

2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the

4 jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the District of Nevada.

5

PARTIES

6

3. Plaintiff Commission is the agency of the United States of America charged with

7 the administration. interpretation and enforcement of Title VII, and is expressly authorized to

8' bring this action by Section 706(f)(1) and (3) and 707 ofTitle VII, 42 US.C. §§ 2000e-5(f)(1)

9 and (3) and 2000e-6.

10

4. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has continuously been a Nevada

11 corporation doing business in the State of Nevada and the City of Las Vegas, and has

12 continuously had at least 15 employees.

13

5. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has continuously been an employer

14 engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b), (g) ,md (h) of

15 Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g) and (h).

16

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

17

6. More than thirt} days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Miguel Hazen, Juan

18 Carlos Bello, Manuel Bello-Monjaras, Claudio Marchi, Octavio Mendoza, and Oscar Pereyra

19 (collectively, "Charging Parties") filed charges with the Commission alkging violatiom; of

20 Title VII by Defendant Employer. All conditions precedent to the institution of thi~ lawsuit

21 have been fulfilled.

22

7. Beginning at least as early as September 25, 1995, and continuing through at

23 least Apri123, 2001, Defendant Employer engaged in unlawful emploYlllent practic~s at its Las

24 Vegas, Nevada offices and at various work sites to which the Charging Parties and a cla,s of

25 ; similarly situated individuals were assigned by Defendant Employer to perform work from day

26 to day, in violation of Section 703 of TitIe VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2. Throughout their

27 employment, the Charging Parties and a class of similarly situated individuals were subj ected to

-2-

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 1 Filed 06/30/2004 Page 4 of 6

a hostile work environment by Defendant Employer because of their national origin (H ispanic).

2 The Charging Parties and class of similarly situated individuals were subjected to severe,

3 pervasive physical and verbal abuse and humiliation by both supervisors and cowo rker:;,

4 including physical harm and unwanted physical contact, and derogatory, hurtful commentary

5 and jokes because of their national origin (Hispanic). Defendant Employer failed:o take

6 immediate preventive and corrective measures to eliminate the discriminatory practices.

7

8. Since at least as early as September 25, 1995, Defendant Employer las engaged

8 in a pattern or practice of resistance to the full enjoyment of the civil rights of the Charging

9 Parties and a class of similarly situated individuals in violation of Section 707 of Title VII,

10 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-6, by creating and maintaining a hostile environment for Hispanic e:nployees

II because of their national origin (Hispanic).

12

9. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraphs 7-8 above has been to

13 deprive Charging Parties and a class of similarly situated individuals of equal employment

14 opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees, because of their national

15 origin (Hispanic).

16

10. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 7-9 above were

17 intentional.

18

II. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 7-9 above were

19 done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Charging

20 Parties and a class of similarly situated individuals.

21

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

22

Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:

23

A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Employer, its officers,

24 successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from (~ngaging in

25 harassment and any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of national

26 origin (Hispanic).

27 III

-3-

- Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL

Document 1

- Filed 06/30/2004

Page 5 of 6

B. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out polkies, practices, and

2 programs which provide equal employment opportunities for Hispanic employees, md which

3 i eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices.

4

C. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Miguel Bazan, Juan Carlos Bello,

5 Manuel Bello-Monjaras, Claudio Marchi, Octavio Mendoza, and Oscar Pereyra, and a class of
I
6 similarly situated individuals, by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses

7 resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraphs 7-11 above, in

8 amounts to be determined at trial.

9

D. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Miguel Bazan, Juan Carlos Bello,

10 Manuel Bello-Monjaras, Claudio Marchi, Octavio Mendoza, and Oscar Pereyra, and a class of

II similarly situated individuals, by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary

12 losses resulting from the unlav.ful practices complained of in paragraph, 7-11 above, including

13 humiliation, emotional pain, suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, and inconvenience, in amounts

14 to be determined at trial.

15

E Order Defendant Employer to pay punitive damages to Miguel Bazan, Juan

16 Carlos Bello, Manuel Bello-Monjaras, Claudio Marchi, Octavio Mendoza, and Oscar P(:reyra,

17 and a class of similarly situated individuals for its malicious and reckless conduct descn bed in

18 paragraphs 7-11 above, in amounts to be determined at trial.

19

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

20 interest.

21

G. Award the Commission its costs of this action.

22 III

23 1//

24 III

25 1//

26 1//

27 1//

-4-

- Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL

Document 1

Filed 06/30/2004

Page 6 of 6

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

2 '

The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions offact raised by its complaint.

3

Eric S. Dreiband

General Counsel

4

James L. Lee

I

5

Deputy General Counsel

6

Gwendolyn Young Reams

ASSOCiate~General~~unse~_ _ _ , .

7

1 I

/

8

c__,__ ----_ ----/-

Ir;

.

~ / - -. ~':;;,

:

'-....
"__ -.,

-.

-

/
<

'

-

-

Anna Y.

" ,....

9

Regional Attorney

10

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

II

Los Angeles District Office

12

13

14

15

16

17

18 I 19
20
21
221 23 24 25 26 27

-5-

 
 2:04ocv-00907-LDG-LR

t

Page 1 of 19

1 MATTHEW Q. CALLISTER, ESQ. Nevada Bar ~: 001396
2 WILLIAM H. BROWN, ESQ. Nevada Bar # 007623

= " FILED ~ ENIERED

RECEIVED
SEF, VED ON

COUNSE.I./PARIIES 0[ RECORD

3

823 Las Vegas Boulevard South

4 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101

Teiephone: (702) 385-3343 5 Facslrnile: (’702) 385-2899

Counsel for F’laintiffs/Intervenors 6

DEPUTY

UNITED STATES DISTRI

C-

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

9
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 10 OP PORTUNITY COMMISSION

11

Plaintiffs,

V,
12 WESTERN CASEWORK CORPORATION,
13 Defendant.
14

Defendants. CASE NO." CV-S-04-0907..LDG-(PAI~)

15 MANUEL BELLO-MONJARAS; JUAN CARLOS BELLO; MIGUEL BAZAN;
16 OSCAR PER.EYRA; OCTAVIO MENDOZA; JULIO CASTILLO; CLAUDIO MARCHI;
17 JORGE CAMPOS,

18

Plaintiffs/Intervenors

19
WESTERN C.ASEWORK CORPORATION; 20 RYAN RYMBERT, in his individual capacity
as an employee/agent of WESTERN 21 CASEWORK CORPORATION; CHRIS
I)AY, in his individual capacity as an 22 employee/agent of WESTERN CASEWORK
CORPORATION; MICHAEL WATTERS, in 23 his individual capacity as an employee/agent
of WESTERN CASEWORK 24 C()RPORAT[ON; BRIAN GUSKI, in his
individual capacity as an employee/agent of
25 WFSTERN CASEWORK CORPORATION; ’ff ESLEY WHYBOURNE, in his individual
26 capacity as an employee/agent of WESTERN CASIS;WORK CORPORATION; and DOES I
27 through X, inclusive; and ROE CORPORATIONS I through X, inclusive,
28

PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION
CIVIL RIGHTS ACTION BASED ON EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION
(42 U.S.C. ~. 2000e, e’l xeq.)
AND
JURY ]DEMAND

Ca}lister & Revroid.s 823 La~ Vegas I~l,.d
South kas Vegas. Ne~a:!a
8010 ’,
(7021 I’J<.3343

T:~Pereya v Weslern Caseworks’\Pleading.4~Firs: Amended 12 emplain : In ]ntep.,cntion wl~d

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 2 of 19

1

Plaintiffs/Intervenors, Manuel Bello-Monjaras, Juan Carlos Bello, Miguel Bazan,

2 Oscar Pereyra, Octavio Mendoza, Julio Castillo, and Claudio R. Marchi, and Jorge Campos

3 (collectively "Plaintiffs/Intervenors") by and through their attorneys, MATTHEW Q.

4 CALLISTER, ESQ., and WILLIAM H. BROWN ESQ., of CALLISTFR & REYNOLDS,

5 hereby allege:

6

7

NATURE OF THE ACTION

8

The Plaintiffs/Intetwenors are former employees of the Defendant; this is their

9

action to recover personal damages resulting from the Defendant’s unlawful

10

discriminatory employment policies and conduct, which were designed to, and

11

did, relegate the Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other Hispanic employees to a

12

subclass whose members were subjected on a daily basis to a barrage of racist

t3

insults, fear, intimidation, threats, coercion, and physical violence because of

14

their race.

15

Plaintiff, the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC) has alleged

16

that the Defendant discriminated against the Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other

17

si~nilarly situated employees on the basis of their national origin (Hispanic) by,

18

among other things, creating a hostile work environment characterized by

19

physical and emotional abuse, humiliation, and a near constant stream of

2t)

offensive, derogatory, racial comments directed at. Hispanics by superiors and

21

co-workers.

22

o The Defendant took no remedial action and in fact, exacerbated the situation by

23

implicitly condoning such behavior and even encouragirtg this conduc! by

24

openly participating in same.

25

As a result, the Defendant deprived the Plaintiffs/Intervcnors of equal

26

employment opportunities and personally damaged them by engaging i.n

,
/

conduct that is unlawful under Title VII and NRS Chapter 613, ~. § 613.310 -

28

.435.

CallSsler & ke’,’~olc;s 823 Las Vegas l~Ix .I
South
Las Vegas, Ne,aza 801,3 I
(7021 385-3343

2

T:kPereya v Western Caseworks PleadingsWirst Amended (.’3:l~plaint In Intervention wpd

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 3 of 19

1 2
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Callis~er & Reynoils 823 kas Vegas BI,d
Sou:h kas Vegas. Ne~ata
8~101 (702} ;8s-3345

Also, the Defendant engaged in a myriad oftortious conduct towards the Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other similarly situated employees and is liable for the resulting damages.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE Jurisdiction is invoked pursuant to pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343, and 1345, as well as Federal Rule of Civil Procedure: 18(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1367 (vesting this Court with jurisdiction to adjudicate state claims under NRS Chapter 13, §§ 613.310- .435). This Court has jurisdiction of this action under Title VII, Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and 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. of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f), Plaintift~/Interver~ors intervene as of right in this action to assert appropriate individual claims as aggrieved parties. Plaintiffs/Intervenors intervene as of right pursuant to Section 706tf) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f). Venue is proper in this Court because the allegedly unlawful employment practices occurred within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the District of Nevada.
PARTIES 10. The EEOC is a United States government agency charged with the
administration, interpretation, and enforcement of Title VII and is exwessly authorized to bring this action under Section 706(1")(1) and (3) of" Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3). 11. Plaintiffs/Intervenors, Manuel Bello-Monjaras, Juan Carlos Bello, Miguel Bazan, Oscar Pereyra ,Octavio Mendoza, Julio Castillo, Claudio R. Marchi,
T:~Pereya v Western Casework s\Plea :tingsLFirst A mend ed (c, mpIaw t I :t Intervention wpd

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 4 of 19

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Callister & Revno!,ls 823 Las Ve~s }~l’. ~
Somh Las Vegas Nevada (702) 385-3347

and Jorge Campos (Plaintiffs/Intervenors) were at all relevant tim,zs employees of Western Casework. 12. Defendant, Western Casework Corporation (Western Casework), is a Nevada corporation doing business in Las Vegas, Nevada, employing al. least fi [teen (15) employees while engaged in an industry affecting commerce as defined in Sections 70I(b), (g), and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-(b), (g), and (h). 13. Western Casework maintains its principal place of business in La,.~ Vegas, Nevada. 14. Western Casework employs at least fifteen (15) employees while engaged in an industry affecting commerce as defined in Sections 701(b), (g), and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-(b), (g), and (h). 15. Plaintiffs/Intervenors are residents of Clark County, Nevada. 16. Defendant, Ryan Rimbert, is a resident of Clark County, Nevada. 17. At all relevant times, Rymbert was an agent of Western (2asework. 18. Defendant, Chris Day, is a resident of Clark County, Nevada. 19. At all relevant times, Day was an agent of Western Casework. 20. Defendant, Michael Watters, is a resident of Clark County, Nevada. 21. At all relevant times, Watters was an agent of Western Casework. 22. Defendant, Brian Guski, is a resident of Clark County, Nevada. 23. At all relevant times, Guski was an agent of Western Casework. 24-. Defendant, Wesley Whybourne, is a resident of Clark County, Nevada. 25. At all relevant times, Whybourne was an agent of Western Case’~vork. 26. The true names and capacities, whether individual, agency, corporate, associate or otherwise, of Defendants, DOES I through X inclusi’ve ("DOES"), and ROE CORPORATIONS I through X inclusive ("ROE CORPORATIONS") are unknown to Plaintiffs/Intervenors. 27. Plaintiffs/Intervenors will seek leave of this Court to arnend this Complaint to show the true names and capacities of these Defendants when th:y become

4

T:~’ereya v Western Caseworks~Plea,Jings\First Amend,xL ( omplaim In lntervemion v, pd

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 5 of 19

i 2 3 4 5
6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Callister & Reynolds 823 [.as \’c~as Bird
South 1.:~s Vegas, Nevada
891(11 {702} 385-33a3

known to Plaintiffs/Intervenors. 28. Plaintiffs/Intervenors believes each Defendant named as a DOD; or R()t~
CORPORATION was responsible in some manner for the events and happenings stated and referred to herein. 29. Plaintiffs/Intervenors reserve the right to amend and supplement this Complaint as to claims and the true names, official capacities, and/or degree of involvement of said Defendant, including but not limited to certification as a class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a). 30. At all relevant times, each of the Defendants was the agent, alter ego, servant, or employee of the remaining Defendant(s). 31. At all relevant times, each was acting within the course and scope: of such agency/employment relationship and with knowledge and consent of the re~naining Defendant(s). All Defendants are jointly and severally liable for the Plaintiffs/Interve:aors’ damages. 33. Additionally, each Defendant is liable for the acts and/or omissio:cts of every other Defendant jointly and severally as tortfeasors and under the doctrine of contribution.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 34. More than thirty (30) days before filing this lawsuit, and more than one
hundred and eigh .ty days (180) days before filing this Complaint in Intervention, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors filed a charge with the Nevada ]:~qual Rights Commission (NERC) and the EEOC alleging violations of Title VII and NRS § § 613.310 - .435 by Western Casework. 35. The EEOC has issued a Letter of Determination finding the Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other similarly situated employees wer.e subjected to unlawful employment practices in violation of Title VII and NRS §§ 613.310 -

5

T:\Pereya v Weslern Caseworksd leadings\First AmendeO C,)~nplainl In lnte~’entian wpd

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 6 of 19

1 2
6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
C~llister & Re~,nold s 823 [,as \egas glv.
Seu:i~ Las Vegas. Ne’,a~i t
89101 (7021 38<L3343

.435, thereby fulfilling all conditions precedent to filing this lawsuit. 36. As early as September, 1995 and continuing until as late as April, 2000., when
Western Casework terminated the Plaintiffs/Intervenors, Western Casework engaged in unlawfiat employment practices in violation o f Section 704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C,. § 2000e-3(a), et al. 37. During that time Western Casework subjected the Plaintif~s/Intervenors to pervasive, systematic discriminatory conduct based on their national origin (Hispanic) that permeated and seethed throughout every level of the workplace and to every jobsite. 38. Western Casework openly and continuously made Hispanics the subject of public ethnic slurs, xenophobic statements, and derogato~:y comments as well as openly physically and emotionally injuring, harassing, and humiliating the Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other similarly situated emplo?ees. 39. For example, before releasing Plaintiff/Intervenor Jorge Campos’ paycheck Western Casework: agents forced him to strip naked below the waisl and be spanked in front of a large group of co-workers purposely called to witness this humiliating event. 40. In another event, Western Casework agents told Plaintiff Julio CastiIlo that if they let them spank him with a baseboard he could have the weekend elf. 41. Another time, Western Casework agents took nail guns loaded with two and one-half (2 ½) inch nails and began shooting them at tlispanic employees. 42. The Hispanic employees were forced to duck, take cover, and hide behind cabinets to avoid being struck and seriously injured or killed. 43. Another incident occurred in which a Western Casework agent told Plaintiff/Intervenor Osar Pereyra "get out of here you stupid iMex!ican" then violently threw him to the ground while non-Hispanic employees looked on and laughed. 44. Western Casework agents routinely handed non-Hispanic employees their

6

T:\Pereya v Western Casewo~ks’~Pleadings~First Arnende] C~mplaint In Intervenlion v, pd

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 7 of 19

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Cailisler & Reynolds 823 k.as Vegas Bird
South [.as Vegas. Nex a~i.~
(702138~ %~4;

paychecks but threw Hispanic employees’ paychecks on 1,he ground. 45. Western Casework agents subjected Hispanic employees to hyper scmtiny and
clearly different standards from their non-Hispanic counterparts wilh respect to pay, job placement, overtime, and breaks. 46., By way of illustration, Western Casework agents paid Hispanic emplo).ees, including the Plaintiffs/Intervenors, less than their counterparts, regularly assigned them to the least desirable jobsites, expected them to work ow~rtime, and forced them to work while their counterparts took breaks, :in one incident forcing them to work for 23 hours straight. 47. Western Casework_ agents publicly called Hispanic workers "beaners", "taco vendors", and "Mexican wetbacks", and made "splashing" sounds when slapping Hispanic workers on the back. 48. A Western Casework agent told Plaintiff/Intervenor Oscar Pereyra "I wish I had been at the border with a shot gun when you came across; I would have shot you and your whole family." 49. Western Casework agents continually threatened and coerced Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other similarly situated employees by threatening to fire them, transfer them to a less desirable worksite, demote them., or call the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to have them deported. 50. Western Casework agents refused to pay Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other similarly situated employees the prevailing wage as required on government jobs because "Mexicans don’t deserve it." 51. Western Casework agents reprimanded Hispanic employees for speaking Spanish to other native Spanish speaking employees. 52. Whenever a Hispanic employee attempted to protest Western Casework’s discriminatory policies and practices Western Casework agents would threaten to either fire him or to call INS, which incidentally illustrates Weslern Casework employed Hispanic individuals knowing they were nol: properly

7

T:\Pereya v Western Caseworks’~Pleadin~s\Fi~st Amende~ C,.nplaim In ~ntewention wpd

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 8 of 19

1 2
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17
18
19
2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 2"7 28
Calli~ter & Rew~oits Las Vegas, Nexz,la gg10~ (702) 38~-334~

documented. 53. In fact, Western Casework’s policy and practice was, and is, to kl~owingly hire
undocumented Hispanic workers for the purpose of exploiting their lack of sophistication and the inherent power imbalance. 54. In turn, this allowed Western Casework to treat Hispanic workers as a subclass of disposable employees, to discriminate against them, and to fire them for even questioning Western Casework’s racist policies tou.ards Hispanic workers. 55. This is not an exhaustive recitation of Western Casework’s actionable conduct but merely a representative sampling of how its discriminatory policies and practices towards Hispanic workers manifested themselves.

FEDERAL CLAIMS

Violation of Title VII - Discrimination Plaintiffs/Intervenors adopt and incorporate paragraphs ’.t through 55. Western Casework violated 42 U.S.C. § 2000e- 2(a)(1) by discriminating against the Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other similarly situated empl.oyees by generally paying them less than their non-Hispanic counterparts because of their race. 58. Between approximately June 29, 1998 and July 27, 2001, Western Casework engaged in unlawful employment practices that violated 42 U.S.C. § 2.300e2(a)(1) by discriminating against Plaintiff/Intervenor Octavio Mendoza with respect to his compensation and in the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because of his national origin. 59. Western Casework paid Mendoza a lower wage than non-Hispanic employees of the same classification for performing the same or similar work, and deprived him of the benefits and opportunities for advancement eNoyed by his

8

T:kPereya v Western Casework~kPlea:hngs\First &r~end~-d (’c, mplaint ht lntern’ention wpd

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 9 of 19

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
19
2O 21 22 2.3 24 25 26 27 28
Callister & 823 I.as Vegas
Sot~th La~ Vegas. Nvw,~a
~’~{12) 385.’~4

non-Itispanic counterparts. 60. This deprived Mendoza of equal employment opportunities and otherwise
adversely affected his status as an employee as a result ot’his national origin. 61. Western Casework’s unlawful conduct damaged the Plaintiffs/Intervenors in
the form of lost wages and income, lost economic opportunity, and pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses including without limitation severe emc~|ional pain and suffering. 62. As a direct and proximate result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors suffered damages in the form of lost wages and income, lost economic opportunity, severe emotional distress and suffering, and additional damages greater than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000). 63. Western Casework acted intentionally, maliciously, and with an intent to injure and thus Plaintiffs/Intervenors are entitled to punitive damages in an amount determined by the trier of fact. 64. As a result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Imervenors have been forced to retain counsel and are entitled to reimbursement for reasonable attorney fees and costs.

Civil Conspiracy - 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) 65. Plaintiffs/Intervenors adopt and incorporate paragraphs 1 through 64. 66. Western Casework agents conspired with each other and/or with other:s. 67. The purpose of this conspiracy was to directly and indirectly deprive
Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other similarly situated employees of equal protection, or equal privileges and immunities, under the laws. 68. One or more of the conspirators did, or caused to be dove, an act in fu:therance of the object of the conspiracy, by, for example, assaulting, battering, [alsely imprisoning, and intentionally inflicting emotional distress upon the Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other similarly situated employees as describe above.

9

T:\Pereya v Western CaseworkAPleadings\First Amended (:omplairt In lnte~,’ention.wpc~

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page I0 of 19

1

69. This was motivated by racial and/or otherwise invidiously cliscriminatol7

2

animus.

3

70. As a result of these conspiratorial acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other

4

similarly situated employees were injured in their persons and property.

5

71. As a result of these conspiratorial acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other

6

similarly situated employees were deprived of having and exercising the rights

7

and privileges of United States citizens, including the federally-established

8

rights to freedom of speech, movement, association, and assembly; the right to

9

petition the government for redress of grievances; their right to be secure in

10

their person; their right not to be enslaved nor deprived of life, liberty, or

property other than by due process of law; and their rights to trawH public roads

without restraint in the same terms as their non-Hispanic counterparts.

72. Western Casework, acted intentionally, maliciously, and with an intent l:o injure

and thus Plaintiffs/Intervenors are entitled to punitive damages in an araount

determined by the trier of fact.

73. As a direct and proximate result of Western Casework’s acts, the

Plaintiffs/Intervenors suffered damages in the form of lost wages and income,

lost economic opportunity, severe emotional distress and suffering, and

additional damages greater than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000).

74. As a result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Inl:ervenors have been

forced to retain counsel and are entitled to reimbursement for reasonable

attorney fees and costs.

STATE CLAIMS

Violation of NRS 613.340 Plaintiffs/Intervenors adopt and incorporate paragraphs 1 through 74. Western Casework violated NRS 613.340 by discriminating against the

0

T:\Pereya v Western Cnseworks~PleadingsWirst Ainen&d Cocnp?akm In h~tepeention ~vpd

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 11 of 19

t 2 3 4 5 6
7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
17 18
19
2O 21 22 2.3 24 25 26 2"7 28
Callisler & Re,,.~olJs 823 LaB Ye~as
Sou:h l_,as Vega~ {?02) 385-3347

Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other similarly situated employees on tb, e basils of their Hispanic origin because they opposed Western Casework’s discriminatory employment practices that violated NRS 613.330 through 613.435. "77.. In addition and alternatively, Western Casework violated NRS 613.340 by discriminating against the Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other sirnilar]y situated employees on the basis of their Hispanic origin because they made charges, and/or testified, and/or participated in an investigation, and/or .proceeding, and/or hearing under NRS 613.330 through 613.435 regarding Wester~ Casework’s unlawful, discriminatory policies and conduct. 78. As a direct and proximate result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors suffered damages in the form of lost wages and income, lost economic opportunity, severe emotional distress and suffering, and additional damages greater than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000). 79. As a result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors have been forced to retain counsel and are entitled to reimbursement for reasonable attorney fees and costs.
Violation of NRS 613.330 Plaintiffs/Intervenors adopt and incorporate paragraphs 1 through 79. Western Casework violated NRS 613.330 by discriminating against the Plaintiffs/Intervenors and other similarly situated employees with respect to their compensation, and/or the terms, conditions, and/or privileges of employment based on their Hispanic national origin. 82. In addition and alternatively, Western Casework violated NRS 613.330 by limiting and/or segregating, and/or classifying the Plaintiffs/Inte~,encrs and other similarly situated employees in a way that deprived them a:nd/or tended to deprive them of employment opportunities, and/or otherwise adversel,~ affected their status as employees because of their Hispanic national origin.

1

T LPereya v Western Caseworks\Plea:Snss\First Amended Complaint In Imervemion wpd

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 12 of 19

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1_~ 14 15
16 17
18
19
20 21 22 23
24
25 26 27 28
Calli~ter & Reyrolds 823 Las Vegas Bl,,d
South gas Vegas. Nevada (702) 3S,-3313

83. As a direct and proximate result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors suffered damages in the form of lost wages and income, lost economic opportunity, severe emotional distress and sufferi:ng, and additional damages greater than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000).
84. As a result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors have been forced to retain counsel and are entitled to reimbursement for reasonable attorney fees and costs.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Plaintiffs/Intervenors adopt and incorporate paragraphs 1 through 84. In engaging in the conduct described herein, Western Casework acted extremely and outrageously intending to, and in fact causing, Ptaintiffs/Intervenors severe emotional distress. 87. Western Casework acted intentionally, maliciously, and with an intent to in.jure and thus Plaintiffs/Intervenors are entitled to punitive damages iv~ an amount determined by the trier of fact. 88. As a direct and proximate result of Western Casework’s acts,, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors suffered damages in the form of lost wages and income, lost economic opportunity, severe emotional distress and suffering, and additional damages greater than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000). 89. As a result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intcrvenors haw’, been forced to retain counsel and are entitled to reimbursement for reasonable attorney fees and costs.

Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress 90. Plaintiffs/Intervenors adopt and incorporate paragraphs 1 through 89. 9]. Western Casework had a duty to avoid causing its employees distress. 92. Western Casework agents breached this duty by, among other things, shooting

2

T:\Pereya v Western Caseworks~Plea,tings\Firs’~ Amended C emplain: hi Intewentioi~ wpd

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 13 of 19

1 2
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 I2 13 14 15
16 17
18
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Callis~er & Re)’n.~lds 823 [.as Vegas Bl~d
SOuti~ I.,as Vegas: Nevad&
t702) 385-

a nail gun at Intervenor/PlaintiffPereyra and two other Hispanic workers, which created a foreseeable risk of physical injury from the nail gun through impact or the threat of impact. 93. This actually and proximately injured Pereyra, and the resulting irtiuries physically manifested themselves. 94~ Additionally, as a direct and proximate result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors suffered damages in the form of lost wages and income, lost economic opportunity, severe emotional distress and suffering, and additional damages greater than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000). 95. As a result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors have been forced to retain counsel and are entitled to reimbursement for reasonable attorney fees and costs.

Negligent Hiring, Training, and Supervision Plaintiffs/Intervenors adopt and incorporate paragraphs 1 through 9~. Western Casework owed a duty to its employees to exercise due care in hiring, training, and supervising its employees. 98. Western Casework breached this duty by negligently hiring, and/or training, and/or supervising its employees, thereby allowing, and/or encouraging them to create a work environment that was overtly hostile to, and discriminatory towards, Hispanic employees including Plaintiffs/Intervenors. 99. As an actual and proximate result of Western Casework’s neglige.nt ac~:s and/or omissions, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors suffered damages in the .fimn of lost wages and income, lost economic opportunity, severe emotional distress and suffering, and additional damages greater than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000). 100. As a result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Interw:nors haw: been forced to retain counsel and are entitled to reimbursement for reasonable

3

T:~erey~ v Western Caseworks\Pleadings\First Amende6 Compl£m in Intervention wpd

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 14 of 19

t 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 lg
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Cadiister & Rey’noic s 823 Las \"e~as ttl~ ..t.
Sot!th l+as Vegas Ne’.’a~a
89t,?1 (702] 3R~.3343

attorney fees and costs.

False Imprisonment 101. Plaintiffs/Intervenors adopt and incorporate paragraphs 1 through 100. 102. Western Casework agent(s) Ryan Rimpert and Wesley ~hybourne
intentionally confined Intervenor/Plaintiff Pereyra within fixed boundaries by shooting a nail gun at him, thereby forcing him to hide behind construction materials and confining him there. 10:3. Western Casework agent(s) intentionally confined the Interven.ors/Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees within fixed boundaries by threatening to reduce their wages if they left the Anthem/Del Webb jobsite, thereby intentionally confining them to the jobsite for 23 hours straight. 104. Western Casework: acted intentionally, maliciously, and with an intent to injure and thus Plaintiffs/Intervenors are entitled to punitive damages in an araount determined by the trier of fact. 105. As a direct and proximate result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors suffered damages in the form of lost wages and income, lost economic opportunity, severe emotional distress and suffering, and additional damages greater than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,(t00). 106. As a result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/In~:ervenors have been forced to retain counsel and are entitled to reimbursement for reasonable attorney fees and costs.

Assault 107. Plaintiffs/Intervenors adopt and incorporate paragraphs 1 through 106. 108. On numerous occasions, Western Casework agents inter, tionally caused the
Plaintiffs/Intervenors to reasonably apprehend an imminent hannfid or offensive touching by, among other things, shooting a nail gun a~I

4

T:’,Pereya v We~lern CaseworksX, Plea¢ling~;~.Firsl :~wend~d Co~nplainl In [nt~:rventien wpd

Case 2:04-cvo00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 15 of 19

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
(’allister & Reyaolds 823 [.as Vegas B1, d
(702) 385-3543

Plaintiff/Intervenor Pereyra and two other Hispanic employees, an~d by slapping Hispanic employees backs and making a "splashing" sound. 109. Western Casework agents intentionally caused the Plaintiffs/Intereenors to reasonably apprehend an imminent harmful or offensive louching by, among other things, publicly spanking Plaintiff/Intervenor Jorge Campos on his naked buttocks. 110. Western Casework acted intentionally, maliciously, and with an intent to injure and thus Plaintiffs/Intervenors are entitled to punitive dmnages in an amount determined by the trier of fact. t11. As a direct and proximate result of Western Casework’s .acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors suffered damages in the tbrm of lost wages and income, lost economic opportunity, severe emotional distress and sufI~ring, and additional damages greater than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000). 112. As a result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors have been forced to retain counsel and are entitled to reimbursemertt for reasonable attorney fees and costs.
Battery 113. Plaintiffs/Intervenors adopt and incorporate paragraphs 1 through 111. 114. Western Casework agents intentionally touched the Plaintffs/intetwenors in a
harmful or offensive manner without consent by, among other things, publicly spanking Plaintiff/Intervenor Jorge Campos before letting him have his paycheck, violently throwing Plaintiff/Intervenor Oscar Pereyra to the ground, and making splashing sounds when slapping Hispanic workers on the back. 115. Western Casework acted intentionally, maliciously, and with an intent to injure and thus Plaintiffs/Intervenors are entitled to punitive damages i:a an amount determined by the trier of fact. 116. As a direct and proximate result of Western Casework’s acts., the

5

T:kPereya v Western Caseworks\PleadingskFir’,;t Amende.t ComplaiT t In lntervenlion wpd

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 16 of 19

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18
19
20 21 22 2.3 24 25 26 27 28
823 Las Vegas 131,,t. South
Las Vegas Nexa,la (702) 385-334:

Plaintiffs/Intervenors suffered damages in the form of lost wages and income, lost economic opportunity, severe emotional distress and suffering, and additional damages greater than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000). 117. As a result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors have been forced to retain counsel and are entitled to reimbursement for reasonable attorney fees and costs.

Defamation/Defamation Per Se ~18. Plaintiffs/Intervenors adopt and incorporate paragraphs I througl~ 116. I19. Western Casework terminated Plaintiff/Intervenor Julio Castilto in April, 2004. 120. Western Casework represented to Castillo that he was terminated because his
superiors were dissatisfied with his performance. 121. However, Western Casework represented to the state unemployment division
that he was terminated because he failed a drug test. 122. Western Casework did not receive the results of the drug; test until two (2) days
after discharging Castillo. 123. Stating Castillo was fired because he failed a drug test is defamatory, as using
drugs lowers esteem for the subject in the community and adversely affects his
reputation.
124. Stating Castillo was fired because he failed a drug test is, defamatory per se, as it implies criminal activity and ineptitude in his chosen profession. Western Casework published these defamatory remarks to, inter alia, the state unemployment division.
126. As a result, Castillo was damaged by being denied unemployment benefits because of Western Casework’s defamatory statements.
127. Western Casework acted intentionally, maliciously, and with an intent to injure and thus Plaintiffs/Intervenors are entitled to punitive damages in an amount determined by the trier of fact.

6

T:~Pereya v Western C aseworks~Plea :~ings~’irst ~,,mend ~{I ( cmplainl In Intervention wpd

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 17 of 19

1 2 3 4
5
6 7 8 9 10 1t 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Caili~er & Rey~hls 823 Las Vegas Bl’.d
South Las Vegas. Neva:ia
8%0! (7021 .~.~5-33 :U

128. As a direct and proximate result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors suffered damages in the form of lost wages and income, lost economic opportunity, severe emotional distress and suffering, and additional damages greater than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars (1575,000).
129. As a result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors have been forced to retain counsel and are entitled to reimbursement for reasonable attorney fees and costs.
Civil Conspiracy - NRS Chapter 613 130. Plaintiffs/Intervenors adopt and incorporate paragraphs 1 through 128. 131. Western Casework agents conspired with each other and/or with others and
acted in concert to violate state laws, including NRS Chapter 613, §§ 613.310 .435, prohibiting employment discrimination on the basis of national origin. 132. This successful conspiracy resulted in unlawful employment practices that actually and proximately damaged the Plaintiffs/Interver~ors. 133. Western Casework acted intentionally, maliciously, and with an inlent to injure and thus Plaintiffs/Intervenors are entitled to punitive damages in an amount determined by the trier of fact. 134. As a direct and proximate result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors suffered damages in the form of lest wages and income, lost economic opportunity, severe emotional distress and suffering, and additional damages greater than Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000). 135. As a result of Western Casework’s acts, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors haw~’ been forced to retain counsel and are entitled to reimbursement for reasonable attorney fees and costs.

7

T:kPereya v Western Caseworks~PleadingsWirs,: Amend~xl C omplai~, h~ Intervention wpcl

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 18 of 19

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 t0
ll
12 13 14 15 16
17
18
19
20 21 22 23
24
25 26 27 28
Callister & Re)no~ds 823 tJa$ Vegas BIv~
LasVe~as Nevad~ 891l)i
(702) 385-3343

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
136. Incorporating and adopting the preceding paragraphs, the Plaintiffs/Intervenors seek judgment against Western Casework as follows: a. Permanently enjoining Western Casework, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it from engaging in discriminatory and retaliatory behavior, and any other employment practice that discriminates on the basis ofna6onal origin. b. Ordering Western Casework to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs that provide equal employment opportunities for people of Mexican and or other Hispanic origin and that eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices. c. Ordering Western Casework to make the Plaintiffdlntervenors whole by providing appropriate compensation for the losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described herein, including without limitation back pay, subsequent loss of income from potential employers, loss of attendant economic opportunity, past and future pecuniary losses, including without limitation all costs and expenses associated with the unlawful employment practices described herein, with prejudgment interest, in an amount greater than $75,000 per Plaintiff/Intervenor as determined by the trier of fact, and ’such other affirmative relief as will eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices. d. Ordering Western Casework to make the Plaintiffs/Intervenors whole by providing appropriate compensation for past and future nonpectmiary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described herein, including without limitation emotional pain, suffering, and humiliation in an amount greater than $75,000 as determir~ed by the trier

8

T:\Pereya v Western Casewerks~,Pleadi ~g.~\Fir~ Amended (:on-plaint :n Intervention wpd

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 11 Filed 09/29/2004 Page 19 of 19

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12
t3 14
15
16 17 18
19
20 21 22 23 24
25
26 27
28
Callister & Re~ncld~ 823 Las V:.4a~ BI~I~
Las Vegas, Nevad~ 891,)1
1702) 3S5 1341

of fact.

Awarding Plaintiffs/Intervenors appropriate punitive damages based on

Western Casework’s malicious, intentionally injurious conduct in an

amount greater than $75,000 as determined by the trier of :f’act.

go

Ordering Western Casework to provide such further relief as this Court

deems necessa~ and proper for the public’s interest and that of

Plaintiffs/intervenors and all other similarly situated employees.

Awarding Plaintiffs/Intervenors reasonable attorney fees and costs

associated with this action.

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

137. Incorporating and adopting the preceding paragraphs, Plaintiffs/Intervenors request a jury trial on all issues and facts arising from this Complaint that may be tried to a jury.

DATED

,2004

Respectfully submitted,
CALLISTER & REYNOLDS

~V~AT’I"

..~ ISTER, ESQ’ ....

Nevada l~a(No.001396

WILLIAM H. BROWN, ESQ.

Nevada Bar No. 007623

CALLtSTER & REYNOLDS

823 Las Vegas Blvd. So.

Las Vegas, NV 89101

Counsel :for Plaintiffs/Intervenors

9

T:\Pereya v Western Caseworks\Pleadings~First ~.:~ende~ ~:emplaint n [nter~entJon.wp~

 
 Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 1 of 21

Anm Y. Park, CA SBN 164242 Chmy-Marie D. Rojas, CA SBN 141482 2 SamanthaE. Blake, CA SBN 169133 C.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 255 East Temple Street, 4th Floor 4 Los Angdes, CA 90012 Telephore: (213) 894-1062 5 Facsimile: (213) 894-1301
6 Attorneys for Plaintiff U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT
7 OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
8 ' KAMER ZUCKER & ABBOTT Scot M_ Abbott #4500
9 300e West Charleston Boulevard, Suite 3 Las Vegas, Nevada 89102
10 Telephone: (702) 259-8640 Facsimile: (702) 259-8646

I

In
;"" j) ,-' .._ 1

. ' , . \

,: ,

- -- -)

/

..--.-_~F-I-L-EI1-----------·-

- __

_' ENTERr"I

'- - .~(l:CUVED

- , . ' '.~, .. --;- __ :)ERIEDO~

_____::. !~'!.~~_~ RfiiS (IF fifCOR)

JUL. 20 J o~---I

---------.- J

CLER~;;,:') ,!llsmfl;-- OURT

I BY: _ Db, r,I€MFN.:'!I) DA

t - '----=:::;; ::::::!,:~~;L<

DEPUTY

._----------_. -ylED
=1 ENTERED

f(EeEIVED
or' ---1-t;,/_t.E.1F'\V.~. D •

COUNSWPARTlE~ OF ffCIJRJ

,-----

JUL 25 20015

Attomey" for Det(~ndant \\'estern Casework Corporation

CLERK US DISTHICT COLj::T
L!B~y:-===OI=ST=RI=CT=O-::!!~,l~:A:DA::=QEPIJT~

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

US. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY)

COi\fMISSTON,

)

)

17

Plaintiff,

)

)

18 I vs.

)

)

19 WESTERN CASEWORK CORPORATION, ) )

20

Defendant

)

2]

-=~~~~~=-~-----)

MANUEL BELLO-MONJARAS, et ai.,

)

)

-Y)

--,')',

vs.

Plaintiffs/Intervenors, ) )
)
)

24 WESTERN CASEWORK CORPORATION, et )

~.,

)

25

)

Defendants_

)

26

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

CASE NO_ CV-S-04-0907-LDG-PAL CONSENT DECREE

28

Page 1 cf 18

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 2 of 21

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 3 of 21

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "EEOC") and Defendant

3 Western Casework Corporation ("Western") hereby stipulate and agree to entry of thi~: Consent

4 Decree t(l resolve the EEOC's complaint, filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a~;

5 amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. ("Title VII"), alleging that: (1) Miguel Bazan, Juan Carlo~;

6 . Belin, f\lanuel Bello-Monjaras, Claudio Marchi, Octavio Mendoza, and Oscar Pereyni

7 (hercinaf:er "Charging Parties") were discriminated against while employed at WeS1.<'Tl1 when

8 they we!'l~ harassed and subjected to a hostile work environment on the basis of their national

9 origin (Hispanic); (2) a similarly situated class of individuals were harassed and subjected to CI

I() hostile work environment on the basis of their national origin (Hispanic) (hereafter 'Clas~·

II Members"): and (3) that Western engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination asaiml

12 employees based on national origin (Hispanic).

13

II. PURPOSES AND SCOPE OF THE CONSENT DECREE

14

A. The parties to this Consent Decree ("Decree") are the EEOC and Western. Th i~

15 Decree sllall be binding on and enforceable against Western and its officers, director), agents.

16 succ,;ssors and assigns.

17

B The parties have entered into this Decree for the following purposes:

18

1)

To provide appropriate relief to the Charging Parties and a sill~ ilarly

19

situated class of individuals;

20

2)

To ensure that Western's employment practices comply with federal law;

3)

To avoid further expenses incident to this litigation;

4)

To ensure that employees are protected from retaliation; and

5)

To provide a final and binding settlement upon the parties ,lS '.0 all

Title VII claims alleged by the EEOC in the Complaint fikd in this adion.

III. RELEASE OF CLAIMS

A. This Decree fully and completely resolves all issues, claims and allegations by the
I
-2'7 ' EEOC against Western that are raised j,n the Complaint filed in this action in the Uni"c:d States

Page 2 of 1f

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 4 of 21

District Court, District of Nevada on June 30, 2004, captioned Equal Employment l2!m.m:tunity

') Commis,ion v. W~stern Casework Com., Case No. CV-S-04-0907-LDG-PAL (the "Complaint"). i

B. Each of the Charging Parties shall execute a separate General Release of Claml~

4 'as to We:;tern thrcugh their separate counsel. EEOC is not a party to that agreement.

5 '

C. Nothing in this Decree shall be construed to preclude the EEOC or Western from

I:

6 : bringing a petition before the Court to mforce this Decree in the event that any party hereto fai l~·

7 to perform the promises and representations contained herein.

8

D. Nothing in this Decree shall be construed to limit or reduce Western's obligation

9 to comply fully with Title VII, the ADEA, or any other federal employment statute.

10

E

This Decree in no way affects the EEOC's right to bring, process, inve,tiglte OJ

II litigue olher charges that may be in existence or may later al"ise against Western in accoriance'

12 with standard EEOC procedures.

13

F. Th. 5 Decree constitutes the good faith, fair and equitable resolution of disputed

14 claims. Western'.s entry into and performance of the tenus and conditions of this Dec: :ee is n01

15 and ,;hall not in any way be construed as an admission by Western of any wrongful act, acts of

16 discrimination, violations of any federal, state or local law, or that any treatment of the Charging

17 Parties or any other person was unwarranted, unjustified, discriminatory or otherwise unlawful.

18

IV. JURISDICTION

19

A. The Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of thi~; la'Nsuit.

20 The Complaint asserts claims that, if proven, would authorize the Court to grant the equitable

21 relief set forth in this Decree. The terms and provisions of this Decree are fair, reasonable and

T)
just. Thi:; Decree conforms with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Title VII, anc is lot in :

derogation of the rights or privileges of any person.

24

B. The Court shall retain jurisdiction of this action for the duration of the' DecTI~e f(lt

25 the purposes of entering all orders, judgments and decrees that may be necessary to inp lemen!

26 and enforce the relief agreed to herein.

27

Page 3 of 18

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 5 of 21

V. EFFECTIVE DATE AND DURATION OF DECREE

2

A. Tll<: provisions and agreements contained herein shall become en~:cliH

3 immediately on the date on which this Decree is entered by the Court ("the Effective Date").

4

B. This Decree shall remain in effect for three (3) years after the Effective Date.

:5

VI. MODIFICATION AND SEVERABILITY

6 i

A.. This Decree comprises the complete understanding of the parties with respect te

7 the mattns contained herein. No waiver, modification or amendment of any provision of thi~

8 Decree will be effective unless made in writing, signed by an authorized representativ,: of eacb

9 of the parties, and entered as an order by this Court.

10

B.

If one or more provisions of this Decree are rendered unlawful or unenfi)[c~abk.

II the ]:arties shall make good faith efforts to agree upon appropriate amendments to thiS Decree in

12 order to effectuate the purposes of thi s Decree. In any event, the remaining provisi on.) wiLL 13 remain in full force and effect unless the purposes of this Decree cannot, despite the partie~L' be)!

14 efforts, be achieved.

15

c.

By mutual agreement of the parties, this Decree may be amended or modified in

16 ' the interests ofjustice and fairness in order to effectuate the provisions of this D(;:cree.

17

VII. COMPLIANCE AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION

18

A. The parties agree that if the EEOC has reason to believe that Western hm f:lileclto

19 comply with any provision of this Consent Decree, the EEOC may bring a petition before lks

20 Court to enforce the Decree. Prior to initiating such petition, the EEOC will notify \/.,'cstern s
21 legal counsel of f(~cord, in writing, of the nature of the dispute. This notice shall spec ilY the

22 I particular provisions that the EEOC believes have been breached. Western shall have ten (l0)

23 days after receipt of the notice to attempt to resolve or cure the breach.

24

B

The parties agree to cooperate with each other and use their best efforts to resolve

-'))- any dispute referenced in the EEOC's notice.

C

Afler ten days have passed with no resolution or mutual written agreement to

-'1'7 extend the time further, the EEOC may petition this Court for resolution of the dispute, seeking

28

Page 4 of l~.

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 6 of 21

all avail,lble relid~ including an extension of the term of the Decree for such period of lime a:;

'1 Western is shown to be in breach of the Decree, the EEOC's costs and attorneys' fee~: incllHed If

.3 secu ring compliance with the Decree, and any other relief the Court may deem approprl :lte.

4

VIII. MONETARY RELIEF

5

Ir. settlement of this lawsuit, Western shall pay up to $600,000.00. $400,000.00 of the

6 settl,:ment amount shall be paid to the following Charging PartieslIntervenors: (1) Migue.i J3azaL

7 Bell,); (2) Oscar Pereyra; (3) Manuel Bello-Monjaras; (4) Claudio Marchi; (5) Jorge Campos.

8 and 16) J Llan Carlos Bello. The remaining $200,000.00 shall be designated as a potential Clas~,

9 Fund.

10

1. Pa),ment to Charging Parties

II

Within ten (10) business days after the Effective Date, Western shall deliver to the ramed i

1.2 Charging Parties, in care of their attorney, The Callister & Reynolds Client Trust Account

1.3 located at 823 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Las Vegas, Nevada 89101, the aggregate SHm of

14 $400,000.00, to be apportioned by their attorney to each Charging Party, and Western shall issu:'

15 an InS Farm 1099 to the law firm of Callister & Reynolds for the amount remitted. The sum

16 disbursed to each Charging Party shall be considered alleged emotional distrc'ss damages and

17 shall be r,;:ported by the law firm of Callister & Reynolds on IRS Form 1099 which form ~:hall be

18 issued to each Charging Party. Western shall also mail a copy of the check to Anna Y. Park

19 Regi,)nal Attorney., U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission at 255 East Teml:ie Street,

20 Four:h Floor. Los Angeles, California 90012.

21

'1
~.

Esl~lblishment of a Class Fund

-'1,"_

As part of the settlement of this lawsuit, the EEOC and Western agree that Wes:ern shall

'_1."J set a,ide the aggregate sum of $200,000.00 to b e held in escrow for the purpose of a potential

24 Clas.'; Fund which may be used to distribute monetary payments among all ehgi :>le class

25 members (as defined below), all in accordance with the provisions of this Decree. The Class '_1I") Fund shal be used solely to make payments to individuals who timely submit daims and whom

-'1'7 the EEOC determines to be eligible to receive monetary relief in this lawsuit ("classmmb~rs"l.
28

PagE: 5 (l f 18

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 7 of 21

The EECC expressly agrees and acknowledges that Western is not obligated to incur anI' costs or

expenses in establishing a separate fund or account, and that Western shall have sa:isfied its

obligati01 under this Paragraph by retaining the above-referenced sum in one of it~; existiq;

4 accounts.

5 I

The EEOC and Western further agree that the potential Class Fund shall be funded withal

6 I six (6) months ailer the Effective Date, and that Western shall, within ten (1 0) bllsines~ days

7 after such funding. provide the EEOC with written verification of the funding.

8

Nolification of Settlement/Claims Process

9

Within ten (10) business days following the entry of this Decree, Western shall forwarci

10 to th~ EEOC the names, social security numbers, and last known addresses of all employees wbo

11 I were employed by Western as a field worker (including installers and helpers) ("Potential Cla~;~.
i
12 Member List") during the time period from January 1, 1999 to the present ("Class Time Period ': I

13 to th,~ EEOC Attn: Samantha Blake, 255 East Temple Street, Los Angeles, California 9001.::.

14

Upon receipt of the Potential Class Member List, the EEOC shall send a que5tie,nnaire tc

15 each Potential Class Member. A copy of the questionnaire shall be transmitted

16 contemporaneously by the EEOC to Western's counsel of record, the law firm of Kamer luckcl
I
17 & Abbott. Each Potential Class Member shall have a period of sixty (60) days from the date of

18 the questionnaire ("the Response Period") to submit it to the EEOC. If a questionnaire.s

19 retuned due to a faulty address, then the EEOC will conduct a database search and attempt to ,_I) contact tre Potent:al Class Member. In the event a questionnaire is re-mailed to a Potential elm:s

21 MelTber due to a jimlty address, that individual shall have sixty (60) days from the date of the reo

"1') mailing tll respond to the EEOC.

, "
_,J

In the event the EEOC receives a timely response, it shall make a determination as to the

24 eligibilit) of each class member and the amount of monetary relief from the Class Fund fi}]' eacb

25 eligible class member; provided, however, that no class member shall be entitled to individual

26 mondan relief in excess of the statutory cap of $50,000.00 per claimant. EEOC has the sole

-"7 discr~tior. in determining class member eligibility, and the allocation of monetary amount(,:) 28

Page 6 of I~.

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 8 of 21

from the Class Fund to each class member. The EEOC shall forward to Western the names,

2 social security numbers, mailing addresses, and monetary allocation of the eligible cla,:;

3 members ("Final Distribution List") no later than twelve (12) months folloWJlllg the Ellectiv(:

4 Date of this Decree.

5

4

Payment to Eligible Class Members

6

Within ninety (90) days after the EEOC has forwarded the Final Distributicn Llst:o

7 Western. Western shall forward payment from the Class Fund to each class member by ce,·tificcl

8 mail. return receipt requested, as determined by the EEOC. All amounts distributed from the

9 : Class Flnd constitute "compensatory damages," under the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 lJ.S.C.

JO §1%la. Western shall issue a FornI 1099 to each eligible class member for any payments

J J disbursed from the Class Fund.

12

5.

Sl!J:plus in Class Fund

J3 I

Ir. the event that the EEOC does not receive timely responses from any class mt:mber, or

J4 if any portion of :he Class Fund, including accrued interest, has not been distributed under this

15 Decree, t1e remaining amount will be retained by Western.

16

IX. GENERAL INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

J 7

A. Non-Discrimination

J 8

1. Harassment Based on National Origin

19

Western, its officers, agents, management (including all supervIsory employees).

:20 SUCCt:ssors, assigns, and all those in active concert or participation with them, or any 0 I' them

21 hereby agree not to: (a) discriminate against persons on the basis of national origin (Hi~par.ic) in

the terms and conditions of employment; (b) engage in or be a party to any action, policy 01

practice that is intended or is known to them to have the effect of harassing or intimidating any

employee on the basis of national origin; and (c) create, facilitate or permit the exsten(:(' of a

;-") work environment that is hostile to employees due to their national origin (Hispanic).

26

2.

Retaliation

27

V\'estern, its officers, agents, management (including all supervisory emplo:Jees],

28

Page -; of I g

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 9 of 21

sllccessors, assigns, and all those in active concert or participation with them, or any 0 f them,

:2 hereby agree not to engage in, implement or permit any action, policy or practice with tlli:

3 purrose ,)f retaliating against any current or former employee or applicant of Western. 0 r eithe:

4 of them, because he or she has in the past, or during the term of this Decree: (a) oppo:,,,d an;'

5 practice made unlawful under Title VII; (b) filed a charge of discrimination alleging such

6 practice: (c) testified or participated in any manner in any investigation (including witho llt

7 limilation, any internal investigation undertaken by Western), proceeding in connection with thi:;

8 case and/or relating to any claim of a Title VII violation; (d) was identified as a possible witne,s

9 or c1aim,:nt in this action; (e) asserted emy rights under this Decree; or (f) sought and/or receivecl

10 anY'eliel'in accordance with this Decree.

1 I

B.

12

Within ten (10) business days after the Effective Date and throughout the term of this

13 Dec! ee, Western shall post a notice (attached hereto as Appendix A) of the terms of this Decree. 14 in English and in Spanish, in at least three (3) clearly visible locations frequented by c:rnployee~;

15 at each OC its facilities.

16

c. E.Yp.al Employment Opportunity Consultant

17

Within thirty (30) days after the Effective Date, Western shall retain an outside Equa]

18 Employment Oppmtunity Consultant ("Consultant") with demonstrated experience in the area oj'

19 employment discrimination and national origin harassment issues, to implement and rIlllnitOl

20 Wes\ern'~; compliance with Title VII and the provisions of this Decree. The Consultant shall bf

subject to the Commission's approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. The EEOC

expressly agrees that the law firm of Kamer Zucker & Abbott is an acceptable selectic,n fI)f the

role of Consultant. If the Commission does not approve Western's proposed Corsultant, tbe 24 Commis"ion shall provide Western with a list of at least three (3) sugg(:sted cand.datcs

acceptable to the Commission. Western shall bear all costs associated with the selectio1 and

26 retention of the Consultant and the performance of his/her/its duties. The Consultant s -2'7 responsibilities shall include:
28

Page 8 of I~.

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 10 of 21

1.

Developing procedures to handle complaints of discrimination, harassment arc

)

retaliation;

,
_1

2.

Creating and implementing Western's new anti-harassment policy and rep.Jrtiq:

4

procedure to more effectively carry out Western's obligations under this Decree:

)

3.

Training managerial and staff/hourly employees on their rights and

6

responsibilities under Title VII, including but not limited to the responsibilities w

7

provide a workplace free of discrimination;

8

4.

Training all employees on policies and procedures relating to natlonal ongm

9

discriminationlharassmc:nt and retaliation;

10

5.

Investigating all complaints of national ongm discrimination/harassment ar-ci

1 1

retaliation;

i:

1:2

6.

Ensuring that Western properly communicates with complainants regarding the

1 3

complaint procedure, status of the complaint/investigation, results of the

14

investigation, and any remedial action taken;

15

7.

Ensuring that all reports required by this Decree are accurately compiled and

16

timely submitted;

17

8.

Creating appropriate and consistent disciplinary policies to hold employee's ane

1 8

managers accountable for failing to take appropriate action and/or for engaglng in

19

conduct prohibited under this Decree;

20

9.

C[(~ating a centralized system of tracking discrimination, harassl'rcent, ar.G

21

retaliation complaints; and

22

10. Further ensuring compliance with the terms of this Decree.

.-c" "

D. Revision of Policies Concerning Discrimination and Harassment

24

With the Consultant, Western shall revise its policy on discrimination and nalio'tal origm

25 hara,smt'nt, and provide a copy to the Commission within sixty (60) days after the Etf~cti\'C

26 Date. The revised policy shall include:

1. A dear explanation of prohibited conduct;
28

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 11 of 21

2

Assurance that employees who make complaints of harassmentldiscri ill .nation 0'

provide information related to such complaints will be protected agams:

, retaliation;
"

4

,
).

A dearly described complaint process that provides accessible and conficenti,L

)

avenues of complaint with contact information including name (if applicable),

6

address, and telephone number of persons both internal (i.e., human resource, I

7

and external to Western (i.e., the EEOC and outside Consultant available ::0

8

handle complaints concerning high level company officials in 'Nestern's

9

corporate hierarchy) to whom employees may report discriminatiOfi and

10

retaliation, including a written statement that the employee may r','port the

1 1

discriminatory behavior to designated persons outside their chain of management

I :2

4.

Assurance that the employer will protect the confidentialit~, of

1 3

harassment/discrimination complaints to the extent possible;

14

5.

A complaint process that provides a prompt, thorough, and Impartial'

1 5

investigation;

16

6.

A procedure for communicating with the complainant in writing regarding th'

I 7

status of the complaintlinvestigation, results of the investigation, and an)

18

remedial action taken; and

19

7.

Assurance that Western will take immediate and appropriate correctj',e action.

20

when it determines that harassment/discrimination and/or retaliation has

2 1

occurred.

'J")

or Tilis revised policy shall immediately be distributed in English and Spanish to all

Weslern':; employees, including management/supervisory staff, and shall be include;! ill any

24 releyant policy or employee manuals distributed to employees by Western. Western sh'-ll cDllect

)-)

acknJwkdgments from each employee who receives the revised policy, in either English cr

26 Spanish depending on the language preference of each employee. Throughout the lerm of this

27 . Decree, Western shall also post the revised policy, in English and Spanish, in a place L1at is 28

Pa!~e 1(I of U:

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 12 of 21

compicuous and ,1ccessible to all employees at each of its locations covered by this DI~crte in a

7 legible font that is a minimum of 14 points in size.

,

J

". Trllining

4

Within sixty (60) days after the Effective Date or thirty (30) days after hirir.g the

5 Con:;ultanl. whichever is later, all of Western's managerial/supervisory, human re~ource;, and

6 stafllhourly employees shall be required to attend an intensive training program of at least 2:;

7 . hours for managerial employees and I.S hours for staff/hourly employees. The training Sf all be

8 mandatory and occur once every year for the term of this Decree. One training each year for

9 staWhourly employees shall be conducted in Spanish, and one training each year for staffi'hour'y

10 emp.oyees shall be conducted in English. Each staff/hourly employee shall be required to 'lttercl

II one 1raining session each year, in a language that each employee best understands.

I '2

1.

All employee training shall include coverage of the subjects of equal empiD:/mel1l

I 3

opportunity rights and responsibilities, national ongm discri cninatioll'

14

harassment, retaliation, and Western's revised policies and procedures for

,

I,

I5 I

reporting and handling complaints of discrimination, harassment and retaliation.

16

2.

The training of managerial employees shall additionally include training 011 hOw!

I 7

to properly handle and investigate complaints of discrimination and/or

18

harassment in a neutral manner, how to take preventive and corrective measur(:~,

19

against discrimination and/or retaliation, and how to recognize and preven1

20

discrimination and/or retaliation.

21

3.

For the remainder of the term of this Decree, all new employees and all

;/

employees recently promoted from a staff/hourly to a managerial position shall

1.3

receive the managerial or stafflhourly employee training, as appropriate, within

2.:1-

thirty (30) days of hire or promotion.

;_.-)

4.

After the initial training as specified above, all employees shall recel Vt the

~6

training at least annually thereafter for the remainder of the term of this DeClee.

27

5.

All employees required to attend such training shall verify tbei r annual

28

Page 11 of 18

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 13 of 21

attendance in writing. Any employees who fail to attend the live trainin~~ shall be

trained within 30 days.

6.

Within forty-five (45) days after the Effective Date or fifteen (15) day~ aft'~i'

hiring the Consultant, whichever is later, Western shall submil to the EEOC it

5

description of the training to be provided and an outline of the cJrri,~ulunt

6

developed for the trainees. Western shall give: the EEOC a mimmum of ten (1 I))

7

business days' advance written notice of the annual training of the date, time and

8

location of each training program provided pursuant to this Decree. aad agree;

9

that an EEOC representative may attend any such training program.

10

7.

Human Resources training shall be specific to their obligations, incLlding the

I 1

handling and investigating of complaints of discrimination and retal:alon. This

12

training shall be above and beyond the supervisor/manager training as set fortlt

13

above.

14

F.

Performance Evaluations

15

F::>r the upcoming review cycle, Western shall revise its performance evaluation forms D)~

16 matHger,; and supervisors in order to include as measures for performance compliance wi tit

17 Western's anti-discrimination and retaliation policies and procedures.

18

At least thirty (30) days prior to implementing the performance evaluati:m form;

19 described above, Western will provide the EEOC and the Consultant with the proposed r,:visions

20 in o:der to provide an opportunity for comment regarding the revisions. EEOC will. provide

21 comments, if any., within 30 days of receipt of the proposed revisions. Western shall r,:spond to

22 such comments within fifteen (15) days ofreceipt. If the parties cannot agree on the proposed

23 revi~;ions, any disputes will be resolved. according to the Dispute Resolution Procedure:; set forth 1_4' I1crem. .
c. Co.mplaint Procedure

2c

Within sixty (60) days of the Effective Date, Western shall develop an internal cOlrplaint

:2 7 procedure to provide for the filing, investigation and, if appropriate, remedying of complai nts 'J t' 28

Page 12 of 18

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 14 of 21

disCI"imination or retaliation.

J

Western shall disseminate and post a notice to all worksites the telephone nurn'XT and

3 contact information for the human resources department or comparable contact person:o make a

-l complair.t of discrimination, harassment or retaliation. Employees shall be informed that a

5 complairt can be made twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week in either Engl ish ,y

6 Spallish, This provision shall also be integrated into Western's policies and procedures.

7

Western and the Consultant shall be responsible for:

8

Publicizing the complaint procedure;

9

Tracking and collecting all complaints filed thereunder;

10

Investigating and resolving such complaints in a timely and effective manne'; and

I I

4.

Retaining records regarding resolution of all such complaints.

12

The internal complaint procedure shall incorporate the following elements:

13

1.

A policy describing how investigations will be conducted;

14

2.

A prompt commencement and thorough investigation by a persoll trained III

I 5

conducting such investigations who is not connected with the complaint:

16

A statement that an investigation should include interviews of all relevam

17

witnesses, including the complainant, and reviews of all relevant documents;

18

4.

A written record of all investigatory steps, and any findings and conclw:ions. and

19

any actions taken;

20

5.

Provision for the reasonably prompt resolution of such complaints;

21

6.

Confidentiality of the complaint and investigation to the extent possible;

7.

Appropriate communication of the final conclusions of the investigation pwvid(:d

to the complainant and provide an opportunity for the complainant to re5pond,

24

and

~. A notice that employees or applicants complaining of discrimination may w;(

26

Western's internal complaint procedure and/or may file charges with the EEOC

or state or local Fair Employment Practice (FEP) agencies. The notice shal abc,

28

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 15 of 21

state that filing an internal complaint does not relieve the complainant of meetillg

,

any applicable deadline for the filing of a charge or complaint with EEOC or state

3

or local FEP agencies. Western's policies and procedures will indicate that it i;

c1

not providing legal advice but informing the employee that applicable deadlin~;

)

nBy exist under state and federal law. The employee shall be informed to contact

6

the EEOC and/or the state or local FEP agency for further information.

7

Western may encourage resolution of internal complaints at a local level pnor to

8 investigation, but not require such informal resolution. A complainant shall not be required to

9 first repc·rt the complaint to a person who is accused of the inappropriate conduct to i [lvoke th,.~

10 Internal Complaint Procedure.

II

The Internal Complaint Procedure will permit, but not require, an employee to i]iliate the

12 complaiLt process by submitting a written complaint on a form designed for the purpose.

13

\Vestern will maintain a policy of non-discrimination and equal treatment, including a

14 policy of zero tolerance for unlawful discrimination, in all of its employment practices.

15

The Internal Complaint Procedure is not intended to supplant the right of any employee

16 to fi e a charge or complaint of discrimination or retaliation under any available municipaL state,

17 or federal law.

18

Western shall publish with the Internal Complaint Procedure the follow]ll1g elements that

19 will be included in the procedure:

20

I

A statement that it is unacceptable to retaliate against any employee for us~ of the

21

Internal Complaint Procedure, for assisting in the investigation of a cOJrplaint, 01'

Y)

for otherwise assisting in the utilization of the procedure.

2.

A ~'tatement that if an allegation of discrimination or retaliation against ;J rnanag'~I'

24

or other employee is substantiated, then such conduct will result in apprcpriate

dis,:ipline, up to and including discharge.

26

H. Neutral Reference

27

Should Western be contacted by prospective employ'crs at any time during th,: term t) ~

28

Page 14 of 18

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 16 of 21

this COIl sent Decree, Western shall glive only the dates of employment and posit or held f;):

! 1\1igJel Bazan, Juan Carlos Bello, Manuel Bello-Monjaras, Claudio Marchi, Octavio '.1';~ndoza,

3 Jorge Campos and Oscar Pereyra.

4

X. RECORD KEEPING AND REPORTING

5

A. Record Keeping

6

Western with the Consultant shall establish a record-keeping procedure that provides f;y

7 the l:entralized tracking of discrimination complaints and the: monitoring of such complaints to

8 prevent retaliation. The records to be maintained shall include::

9

I.

All documents generated in connection with any complaint, investigation into, Of

10

resolution of every complaint of discrimination or retaliation for the duration OC

I I

the Decree and the identities of the parties involved;

12

2.

All forms acknowledging employees' receipt of Western's revised discrimi1atioli

13

and anti-retaliation policy;

14

3.

All documents verifying the occurrence of all training sessions and namc:s and

15

positions of all attendees for each session as required under this Decree; and

J6

4.

Documents tracking and analyzing complaints filed against the same ,cmployee

J7

and location.

J 8

The foregoing documents shall be summarized in the semi-annual reports set 1'011:11 below.

J9

B. Reporting

'_rI )

In addition to the notices to the EEOC specified above, Western shall provlce thf

followinr: reports to the EEOC in writing, by mail or facsimile:

j,

1.

Within ninety (90) days after the Effective Date, Western shall submit 10 thf

23 EEOC an initial report which contains:

24

(a) A copy of the revised discrimination and anti-retaliation policy;

25

(b) A summary of the procedures and record-keeping method>i developed

26

with the Consultant for centralized tracking of discrimination complaint~

and the monitoring of such complaints; 28

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 17 of 21

(c) A statement confirming that the requir,~d notices pertaining to th:IS Dccrel.~

and the revised discrimination and anti-retaliation policies have been

,
-'

posted; and

(d) Copies of all employee acknowledgment forms indicating n::ceipl of th,.~

)

revised discrimination and anti-retaliation policy.

6

Western shall also provide the following reports semiannually throu~:hout thl.~

7 term of tl1is Decrt:e:

8

(a) The attendance lists of all attendees for all training sessIOns required

9

under this Decree that took place during the previous six months:

10

(b) Acknowledgments of receipt of the revised discrimination and harassment

1 1

policy for all employees hired during the previous six months; and

12

(c) A description of all discrimination and/or retaliation complaints made

13

since the submission of the immediately preceding report hereunder. Thi:;

14

description shall include the names of the individuals alleging harassme1t

15

or retaliation, the nature of the harassment or retaliation, the names of the

16

alleged perpetrators of harassment or retaliation, the dates of the alleged

17

harassment or retaliation, a brief summary of how each complaint was

1 8

resolved, and til::: identity of the person(s) who investigated or re,olveci

19

each complaint. If no results have been reached as of the time Ilf the

20

report, the result shall be included in the next report;

21

(d) An analysis of the monitoring done for repeat complaints b) employee~;

Y)

and by location; and

(e) Western shall provide a report to the EEOC detailing any changes )f tlw

24

procedures or record-keeping methods for centralized lracking of

25

discrimination complaints and the monitoring of such compiai11l:s \vithir

26

thirty (30) days before implementing such changes.

28 Pa,2;e 16 Ilf I g

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 18 of 21
XI. COSTS OF ADMINISTRAnON AND IMPLEMENTATION OF CONSENT DECREE
\Vestern shall bear all costs associated with its administration and implementation of it;
obli:sations under this Consent Decree.
XII. COSTS AND ATTORNEYS' FEES
Each party shall bear its own costs of suit and attorneys' fees.
XIII. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 7
A. During the term of this Consent Decree, Western shall provide a1Y potential 8
1
I successor-in-interest with a copy of this Consent Decree within a reasonable time of no': Ie,s than 9
thirty (30) days prior to the execution of any agreement for acquisition or assumption:>f control 10
of any or all of Western's facilities, or any other material change in corporate structure, and shall 1 1
simultaneously inform the EEOC of same. 12 !
B. During the term of this Consent Decree, Western and its successors shall lssure 13
that each of its officers, managers and supervisors is aware of any term(s) of this Decree which 14
may be related to his/her job duties. 15
C. Unless otherwise stated, all notices, reports and correspondence required undel·1 16
this Decree shall be delivered to the attention of the Regional Attorney, Amla Y Park. U.S. 17
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Los Angeles District Office, 255 East T~mplc 18
Street. 4th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90012. 19
D. The parties agree to entry of this Decree and judgment subject to final approval by 20
the Cour1. 21
/ I!
Y)
///
_' pJ
/ / I
24 -, - j/I
-)
j/I
26
27 / 'I I'
28
Pa2;e 17 I)f 1g

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 19 of 21

f.

The parties agree to sign in counterparts, and each such counterpan ~;hall h~

deell1ed an original as to the party to be charged.

t}#t 5

DATD CI S. EQUl<\(

E~1P/L1~.~M0/E0NCT;>$

OPPORTUNrH COMMISSION

6

7

.

~)

i1f: 1 8

B

.¥"tj,'-,'...Yc5~}Q
Anl!a y;/pttrk, CA SBN 16424

9 /) Cherry-Mari(: D. Rojas, CA SB 141482

- Samantha E. Blake, CA SBN 169133

10

255 East Temple Street, 4th Floor

1 1

Los Angeles, California 90012

Tel: (213) 894-1062

12

Fax (213) 894-1301

DATED: KAMER ZUCKER & ABBOTT
BY:~~" Scott M. Abb tt #4500 3000 West Charleston Boulevard,. Suite J Las Vegas, Nevada 89102 Tel: (702) 259-8640 Fax: (702) 259-8646
Attorneys for Defendant

13

Attcmeys for Plaintiff

14

ORDER

15

Tllis Coun having found that the foregoing Consent Decree was entered into in good fairh

16 and:hat:he terms of the foregoing Consent Decree are fair, reasonable, and just, the provisions

17 of the foregoing Consent Decree are hereby approved and compliance with all provisions thereof

18 is HEREI3Y ORDERED.

19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20
21 Date: -.-Dl~--)---TF "--+----¥--1.L---"--(J4~

24 2S
16
27

Page :I 8 of 1S

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 20 of 21

APPENDIX A

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUN1TY COMMISSION

Los Angeles District Office

255 E. TEMPLE STREE"', 4" FLOCIL

LOS ANGELl-S, CAI.IFOR·'HA 9001::

(2 J:i )~.q4·1 OJII TDD (:: IJ) ~"4·112 FAX (213) 8)4·11:8

!"OTICE OF SETTLEMENT AND CONSENT DECREE
TO: ALL EMPLOYEES OF WESTERN CASEWORK CORP.:
Tle C.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") filed a lawsuil: m th Unikd S:ates District Court for the District of Nevada entitkd Equal Employment O.l)I!~iItllI!iJ..Y C~»l1Dlis;;ion \~~~estern Casework COIP:., Case No. CV-S-04-0907-LDG-PAL, on .Tulle 30 2004. TIe EEOC's lawsuit alleged that Western Casework discriminated against and harassed workers ill violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 on the basis of national origin (Mexican or Hispanic).
The parties settled the case by entering into a three (3) year Consent Decree. Western Casel,vork agreed to pay monetary relief to charging parties and a class of potential claimants to be identified by the EEOC. Western Casework also agreed to implement company-wide injunctive relief r,:medies including, but not limited to, reviewing the company's poliCies and procI:dures for handling complaints of discrimination and retaliation, distributing the company's policy against discrimination and harassment to employees in English and Spanish, and proViding annual training to all employees and managers addressing issues of discrimination and retaliation, hiring a consultant to effectuate the tenms of the Consent Decree, agreeing to posting a notice of the Consent Decree, and holding managers and supervisors accountable by revamping their perfOlmance evaluation system.
Pursuant to the Consent Decree, Western Casework is providing notice to you that it is committed to a workplace free from discrimination, harassment, and retaliation. V/cstern Casework's policy against discrimination and retaliation applies to all persons at Western Casework, including its owners, shareholders, directors, officers, other management officials, supervisors, vendors, suppliers, third parties and customers. Any alleged violations of \!/estern Casework's policy against discrimination and retaliation will be promptly, thoroughly and impartially investigated. Individuals found to have violated that policy will be su.bject to discipline up to and including tenmination of employment.
R\~gardless of whether you complain internally to Western Casework, you als:) h.lVe a right to file a charge with the EEOC if you feel that you have been discriminated against i1 violation of federal. employment discrimination laws such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Di~crimination in Employment Act of 1990, the Americans with Disabilities An or the EqJal Pay Act. In particular, if you feel that you have been discriminated against due t.) your national origin or retaliated against because of the filing of a charge of discrirnil1atioL,

Case 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL Document 42 Filed 07/20/2005 Page 21 of 21

giving testimony or assistance, or partieipating in any manner in any investigation, proceeding 0' hearing, you should contact the EEOC immediately at:

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 255 East Temple Street, 4th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90012
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (800) 669-4000 or (213) 894-1000.

F,~deral law prohibits discrimination against any employee or applicant for employmem because of a person's age, disability, race, sex, color, religion or national origin, with respect 1(0 hiring, compensation, promotions, discharge, terms and conditions or privileges of employment Wes:ern Casework is committed to complying with federal anti-discrimination laws in a1 respects. Westem Casework will not tolerate sex, race, or national origin haras~,mel1t, 0)' discrimination against any persons because of their sex, national origin, age, race, color. religon, or disability; and will not tolerate retaliation that violates Title VII, the Ag< Discimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act or the Equal Pay Act.

EEOC enfc)rces Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employmenl discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin; the Age Discriminat:on in Employment Act; the Equal Pay Act; Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which prohibits employment discrimination against people with disabilities in the private secwr and state ancl local governments; prohibitions against discrimination affecting individual s with disabilities in the federal government; and sections of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, Further information about the Commission is available on its Web site at www.eeoc.gov.

You may obtain a copy of the Consent Decree at your expense. To obtain a copy, you must con1act the Office of the U.S. District Court Clerk at:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 33: South Las Vegas Blvd. Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 (702) 464-5400

THIS IS AN OFFICIAL NOTICE AND MUST NOT BE DEFACED BY ANY~)'Nl~

This Notic,,; shall remain posted in a clearly visible location frequented by employees 2.t

all of Western Casework's facilities for three years from the date upon which the Court signs this

Notice.

--4- o~, It " w ORDERED thi, (l,y

2005.

'It--T-,~0~Z4§i~;~ __
CT COeRT nhGI::

 
 CM/ECF - nvd - District Version 2.05 - Docket Report

https://ecf.nvd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?101421240070626-L_92...

United States District Court District of Nevada (Las Vegas) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission VS Western Casework Corp., Assigned to: Judge Lloyd D. George Referred to: Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen
Magistrate Judge Lawrence R. Leavitt (Settlement) Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

Date Filed: 06/30/2004 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff Jeffrey U'ren

represented by Anna Park U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 255 East Temple Street 4th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90012213-894-1083 Email: anna.park@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Samantha E. Blake United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Legal Unit 255 East Temple Street 4th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90012(213) 894-1000 Fax: 213-894-1118 Email: lado.legal@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Chris Day

represented by Irwin B. Simon Irwin B. Simon, Law Office of 2740 Marysville Ave Henderson NV, NV 89052 702-693-4337 Fax: 702-617-9375 LEAD ATTORNEY

1 of 6

6/12/2007 11:45 AM

CM/ECF - nvd - District Version 2.05 - Docket Report
Defendant Brian Guski Defendant Ryan Rymbert Defendant Michael Watters
Defendant Western Casework Corporation
2 of 6

https://ecf.nvd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?101421240070626-L_92...
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lisa D. Parker * Warning - no current address on file prepare a Bar Attor . ., NO 00000 000-000-0000 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Tamela L. Kahle Kahle & Associates 7660 W Sahara Ave Suite 110 Las Vegas, NV 89117 702-453-2200 Fax: 702-453-2201 Email: kahleandassociates3@earthlink.net LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Bryan J. Cohen Kamer Zucker Abbott 3000 West Charleston Blvd. Suite 3 Las Vegas, NV 89102-1990 702-259-8640 Fax: 702-259-8646 Email: ecf@kzalaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ryan P. Hammond Littler Mendelson, PC 3960 Howard Hughes Parkway Suite 300 Las Vegas, NV 89109 (702) 862-8800 Fax: (702) 862-8811 Email: rhammond@littler.com
6/12/2007 11:45 AM

CM/ECF - nvd - District Version 2.05 - Docket Report

https://ecf.nvd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?101421240070626-L_92...

Defendant Wesley Whybourne

TERMINATED: 07/28/2005 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Scott M. Abbott Kamer Zucker & Abbott 3000 West Charleston Blvd. Las Vegas, NV 89102 702-259-8640 Fax: 702-259-8646 Email: sabbott@kzalaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed
06/30/2004 06/30/2004
06/30/2004 07/06/2004 08/04/2004
09/07/2004 09/07/2004
09/07/2004 09/13/2004
09/20/2004 09/20/2004
09/28/2004
09/29/2004

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT obo P (Entered: 07/06/2004)
2 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES obo P (cpy to LDG&PAL) (Entered: 07/06/2004)
SUMMONS ISSUED to P (1) (Entered: 07/06/2004)
3 NOTICE (OTHER) of referral to ENE. cpys dist. (Entered: 07/06/2004)
4 WAIVER OF SERVICE EXECUTED Waiver of svc of summs obo P. (Entered: 08/06/2004)
5 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Answr to cmplt obo D. (m) (Entered: 09/08/2004)
6 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES obo D. (m) (cpy to LDG & PAL) (Entered: 09/08/2004)
7 STATEMENT Disc stmnt obo D. (m) (Entered: 09/08/2004)
8 ORDER ORD: An ENE session is sched for 11-5-04 @ 9:30am. cps dis (Entered: 09/13/2004)
SUMMONS ISSUED (6) summs iss'd to Ps/Intervenors (Entered: 09/22/2004)
9 INTERVENOR COMPLAINT Cmplt in intervention w/jury demand obo Ps/Intervenors. (nss) (Entered: 09/22/2004)
10 ORDER ORD: The ENE session, sched for 11-5-04 @ 9:30am is RESCHED to 12-8-04 @ 9:30am. cps dis (Entered: 09/30/2004)
11 AMENDED COMPLAINT 1st amnd'd cmplt in interventn w/jury demand obo Intervening Ps. (Entered: 09/30/2004)

3 of 6

6/12/2007 11:45 AM

CM/ECF - nvd - District Version 2.05 - Docket Report

https://ecf.nvd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?101421240070626-L_92...

09/30/2004 10/05/2004 10/06/2004 10/14/2004 10/14/2004 10/14/2004 10/14/2004 10/14/2004 10/14/2004 10/14/2004 10/14/2004 10/14/2004 10/14/2004 10/15/2004 10/19/2004 10/19/2004 10/19/2004 10/21/2004 10/25/2004 10/26/2004 11/15/2004

12 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Cert of mailing of amnd'd cmplt in intervetn #11 obo Intervening Ps. (Entered: 10/01/2004)
SUMMONS ISSUED (6) amnd'd summs iss'd to P (Entered: 10/07/2004)
13 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES obo Intervening Ps. (m) (cpy to LDG & PAL) (Entered: 10/07/2004)
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENT disc plan. sub to PAL (Entered: 10/15/2004)
14 ORDER The ENE session sched for 9:30 am on 12/8/04 is hereby vac & resched for 9:30 am on 12/10/04. (cps dist) (Entered: 10/19/2004)
15 ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE of summns, amended summns & P's first amd complt in Interventions by D/Western Casework Corp. (Entered: 10/19/2004)
17 SUMMONS ISSUED to P (for service on D/Whybourne). (Entered: 10/19/2004)
18 SUMMONS ISSUED to P for service to D/Western Casework Corp. (Entered: 10/19/2004)
19 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED amended summons served by P on D/Whybourne. (Entered: 10/19/2004)
20 SUMMONS ISSUED to P for service on D/Watters (Entered: 10/19/2004)
21 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED by P on D/Chris Day. (Entered: 10/19/2004)
22 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED on D/Watters obo P. (Entered: 10/19/2004)
23 SUMMONS ISSUED obo P (for service to D/Day.) (Entered: 10/19/2004)
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENT Stip and req for ext of time to file resp pleading. (PAL) (Entered: 10/15/2004)
16 SUMMONS ISSUED amended summns issd to P for service on D/Western Casework Corp. (Entered: 10/19/2004)
24 ORDER ON STIPULATION that disc ddl is 7/18/05, dispo mtn ddl is 8/17/05, and pto ddl is 9/16/05. (cps dist) (Entered: 10/20/2004)
25 ORDER ON STIPULATION that Dft Western Casework has utnil 10/25/04 to file a resp pleading. (cps dist) (Entered: 10/20/2004)
26 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE of Ps/Intervednors' initial disclosures pursuant to FRCP 26(a)(1) (Entered: 10/21/2004)
27 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT to Ps 1st amended cmplt in interventn obo D/Western Casework Corp. (m) (Entered: 10/27/2004)
28 SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED as to D by serv Ryan Rymbert on 10/15/04 (Entered: 10/27/2004)
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENT stip to ext Dft Michael Watter's time to file a resp - LDGstip to ext Dft Wesley Whybourne's time to file a resp - LDG (Entered: 11/15/2004)

4 of 6

6/12/2007 11:45 AM

CM/ECF - nvd - District Version 2.05 - Docket Report

https://ecf.nvd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?101421240070626-L_92...

11/17/2004 11/19/2004 11/19/2004 11/19/2004 11/24/2004 12/01/2004 12/03/2004 12/03/2004 12/06/2004 12/08/2004 12/13/2004
01/12/2005 01/26/2005 01/31/2005 02/02/2005 02/03/2005
07/20/2005 07/28/2005 08/05/2005

MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENT stip ext time Dft to file resp - LDG (Entered: 11/17/2004)
29 ORDER ON STIPULATION ORD: D Wybourne has until 12-1-04 to fl a rspnsv pleading. cps dis (Entered: 11/22/2004)
30 ORDER ON STIPULATION ORD: D Watters has until 12-1-04 to fl a rspnsv pleading. cps dis (Entered: 11/22/2004)
31 ORDER ON STIPULATION ORD: D Rymbert has until 12-1-04 to fl a rspnsv pleading. cps dis (Entered: 11/22/2004)
32 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Answr to P's 1st amnd'd cmplt in interventn obo D Day. (m) (Entered: 11/30/2004)
33 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Answer to 1st amnd'd cmplt in interventn obo D Watters. (m) (Entered: 12/02/2004)
34 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Answr to 1st amnd'd cmplt obo D Whybourne. (m) (Entered: 12/06/2004)
35 ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Answr to 1st amnd'd cmplt obo D Rimbert. (m) (Entered: 12/06/2004)
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENT stip to extnd disc d'dline. to PAL (Entered: 12/06/2004)
36 ORDER ON STIPULATION ORD: Ps/intervenors have until 12-8-04 to rspnd to all WCC's discovery. cps dis (Entered: 12/08/2004)
37 ORDER ORD: D to produce the relevant payroll records by 12-23-04; FUR ORD: A sttlmnt conf is sched for 1-11-05 @ 9:30am; FUR ORD: Formal disc proceeds shall be STAYED pndng sttlmnt conf. cps dis (Entered: 12/14/2004)
38 ORDER that tele hrg on settlement discussions is sched for 1/26/05 @ 11:30 am. (cps dist) (Entered: 01/12/2005)
39 ORDER ORD: The telephonic hrng sched for 1-26-05 is VACATED and RESCHED to 2-2-05 @ 4pm. Ct will initiate call. cps dis (Entered: 01/26/2005)
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENT stip'd prot ord. to PAL (Entered: 02/01/2005)
40 ORDER ON STIPULATION ORD: Stip'd prot ord. (see doc). cps dis (Entered: 02/02/2005)
41 MISCELLANEOUS HEARING (not recorded) - ORD: Ptys to submit confidential records & briefs by 2-16-05 'in camera'. The Ct will thereafter sched a follow-up telephonic stat conf. cps dis (Entered: 02/03/2005)
42 ORDER ORD: Consent Decree is APPROVED (see doc). cpys dist (Entered: 07/25/2005)
43 NOTICE (OTHER) by Dft Western Casework of change of cnsl. (s) (Entered: 08/02/2005)
MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENT Stip for dism. (LDG) (Entered: 08/05/2005)

5 of 6

6/12/2007 11:45 AM

CM/ECF - nvd - District Version 2.05 - Docket Report

https://ecf.nvd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?101421240070626-L_92...

08/08/2005

44 ORDER ON STIPULATION that action is dism w/prej. (cps dist) (Entered: 08/09/2005)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

06/12/2007 09:44:53

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code:

eeoc

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

2:04-cv-00907-LDG-LRL

Billable Pages:

3

Cost:

0.24

6 of 6

6/12/2007 11:45 AM

 
 Western Casework to Pay $600,000 for Harassment of Hispanic Employ...

http://www.eeoc.gov/press/7-22-05.html

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE July 22, 2005

CONTACT: TTY:

A. Luis Lucero, Jr. Acting Regional Attorney (213) 894-1083
Olophius E. Perry District Director (213) 894-1112
Samantha E. Blake Trial Attorney (213) 894-1062
(213) 894-1121

WESTERN CASEWORK TO PAY $600,000 FOR HARASSMENT OF HISPANIC EMPLOYEES BASED ON NATIONAL ORIGIN

EEOC SUIT SAID CABINET MAKER SUBJECTED CLASS OF LATINOS TO PHYSICAL AND VERBAL ABUSE
LAS VEGAS – The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today announced a $600,000 settlement of a national origin harassment lawsuit against Western Casework Corporation, a Las Vegas-area cabinetmaker that supplies cabinetry to businesses and commercial construction projects.
The lawsuit, filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, alleged that the company's supervisors and other workers subjected six Hispanic males, who were field workers at the company, along with a class of similarly situated workers, to severe, pervasive physical and verbal abuse and humiliation. The unlawful conduct included physical harm and unwanted physical contact; and derogatory, hurtful commentary and jokes. The suit also alleged that the company engaged in a pattern or practice of such abuses. Eight workers, including the six originally named, later intervened as plaintiffs in the lawsuit. In part, the settlement terms require Western Casework to pay $400,000 to some of the workers and to set aside an additional $200,000 for potential class members who may come forward in the coming months.
The company has also agreed to hire a consultant to develop and implement new policies and procedures for handling complaints of discrimination and harassment. EEOC's lawsuit was filed in June 2004 in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, Case No. CV-S-04-0907-LDG-PAL.
Acting Regional attorney Luis Lucero of the EEOC’s Los Angeles District Office said of the settlement, "This should serve as a warning to companies out there that the abuse of Latino workers will not be tolerated. We are pleased, however, that Western Casework acted cooperatively in achieving a resolution of this matter and we commend them for it."
The EEOC’s Los Angeles District Office investigates complaints of discrimination from employees working in Nevada. District Director Olophius E. Perry added, "Employers who have effective anti-harassment policies in place can avoid the serious problems encountered by these employees. We want to work proactively with any employer to help prevent or quickly identify harassment issues so that the employer can take prompt and appropriate action to ensure a harassment-free work environment."
EEOC enforces Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act; the Equal Pay Act; Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which prohibits employment discrimination against people with disabilities in the private sector and state and local governments; prohibitions against discrimination affecting individuals with disabilities in the federal government; and sections of the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Further information about the Commission is available on its Web site at www.eeoc.gov.

This page was last modified on July 22, 2005.

Return to Home Page

1 of 1

6/12/2007 11:55 AM

 
 EEOC LITIGATION SETTLEMENT REPORT - July 2005

http://www.eeoc.gov/litigation/settlements/settlement07-05.html

EEOC v. Western Casework Corp. No. CV-S-04-0907-I-DG-PAL (D. Nev. July 20, 2005)
The Los Angeles District Office alleged that defendant, which supplies cabinetry to businesses and commercial construction sites in the Las Vegas, Nevada area, subjected six charging parties and several others (installers and helpers) to a hostile work environment based on their national origin (Hispanic) in violation of Title VII. Supervisors as well as coworkers committed the harassing conduct, which included humiliating physical and verbal assaults, insults, and ethnic epithets.
Under the 3-year consent decree resolving this case, defendants will pay up to $600,000 in monetary relief, consisting of $400,000 in damages for emotional distress to be apportioned among the charging parties and $200,000 to be held in escrow as a class fund for distribution as compensatory damages to eligible installers and helpers who submit timely claims. Within 12 months of entry, the EEOC will identify eligible claimants and determine the amount each will receive from the class fund, not to exceed $50,000 per person. The decree requires defendant to post a notice in at least three locations at each facility informing employees of the resolution of the lawsuit and defendant's obligations thereunder, and of their right to file a charge with the EEOC. Defendant must also hire an EEO consultant approved by EEOC to develop and implement discrimination and harassment policies and procedures, including internal EEO complaint procedures. Defendant will provide mandatory EEO training to managerial and human resources staff (2.5 hours) and to hourly staff (1.5 hours) once a year. Defendant will offer separate training sessions for staff in English and in Spanish and each employee may elect to take the training in whichever language he or she understands best.

1 of 1

6/12/2007 11:58 AM