• Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW

Document 1

•Filed 08/05/2003

Page 1 of 5

UNITEDST EASTERN
------------------------------------------------------x
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

NorCOURT
Civil Action No.

38

Plaintiff,

-againstJOHN HARVARD'S BREW HOUSE, LLC,
Defendant. ----------------------------------------------------------x

COMPLAINT JURY TRIAL DEMAND

J>
\NALL,'M.J,

NATURE OF THE ACTION This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex, and to provide appropriate relief to Jennifer James. As alleged with greater specificity below in paragraph eight (8), the Commission charges that Defendant has engaged in sex discrimination by taking adverse employment action against Ms. James because of her pregnancy.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction ofthis Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Sections 706(t)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(t)(1) and (3) ("Title VII") and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. §1981a. 2. The alleged unlawful employment practices were and are now being committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
PARTIES 3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), is

• Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW

Document 1

•Filed 08/05/2003

Page 2 of 5

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

enforcement of Title VII, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Sections 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3).

4. At all relevant times, John Harvard's Brew House, LLC, has continuously been a

company doing business in the State of New York and the county of Suffolk, and has continuously had at least fifteen (15) employees.

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

industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701 (b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g) and (h).

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

6. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Jennifer James

filed a charge with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by Defendant. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.

7. Since at least May 2001, Defendant has engaged in unlawful

employment practices in violation of Section 703 of TitIe VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2. In May

2001, Ms. James was elevated to a management career path, after having worked first as a Server

in June 2000 and then as a Supervisor from approximately February 2001. However, once Ms.

James informed Defendant of her pregnancy, Defendant took adverse employment actions against her including:

A. Altering the terms, conditions, or privileges of her employment by

discontinuing her management training and removing her from a managerial career track; and

2

• Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW

Document 1

•Filed 08/05/2003

Page 3 of 5

B. Denying her any work assignments despite her repeated requests and

terminating her employment in approximately August 2001.

8. The effect of the practices complained of above has been to deprive Jennifer

James of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect her status as an

employee because of her sex.

9. The unlawful employment practices complained of above were and are

intentional.

10. The unlawful employment practices complained of above were and are done with

malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Jennifer James.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:

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

assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from engaging in

employment practices which discriminate on the basis of sex.

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

which provide equal employment opportunities for women and which eradicate the effects of

Defendant's past and present unlawful employment practices.

C. Order Defendant to make whole Jennifer James by providing appropriate backpay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief

necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices, including, but not limited

to, front pay and reinstatement.

D. Order Defendant to make whole Jennifer James by providing compensation for

3

• Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW

Document 1

•Filed 08/05/2003

Page 4 of 5

past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described above, in amounts to be determined at trial.

E. Order Defendant to make whole Jennifer James by providing compensation for

past and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of above,

including pain, suffering and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial.

F. Order Defendant to pay Jennifer James punitive damages for Defendant's

malicious and reckless conduct described above, in amounts to be determined at trial.

G. interest.

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

H. Award the Commission its costs of this action.

4

• Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW

Document 1

•Filed 08/05/2003

Page 5 of 5

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

complaint.

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

Respectfully submitted,

James L. Lee Deputy General Counsel
Gwendolyn Y. Reams Associate General Counsel
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1801 "L" Street, N.W. Washington D.C. 20507

atherine E. Bissell (KB 1831) egional Attorney
Eliza eth Grossman (EG 2478) Supervisory Trial Attorney

New York D' nct Office 33 Whitehall Street, 5th Floor New York, N.Y. 10004 (212) 336-3703 (212) 336-3623 (facsimile)
5

 
 Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
______________________________________________________ ---------J[
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

c;n-,
ofF Filed 06/01/2004 Page 1 of 15
FILED
IN CLEHK'S OFFICE
U.S. DISTRICT COURT E.D.N.Y
* * MAY 28 2004
LONG ISLAND OFFICE

Plaintiff, -againstJOHN HARVARD'S BREW HOUSE, LLC,

Civil Action No. 03-CV-3800
(ADS)(WDW)
FIt.ED
IN CLERK',') CF':ICE US. DISTHICT COURT [.D.N.Y

Defendant.
______________________________________________________- - - - - - - - - - - - J[

* * JUN 0 1 2004

CONSENT DECREE

LONG ISLAND OFFICE

This cause of action was initiated on August 5, 2003, by the United States Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") alleging that John Harvard's Brew House LLC ("Defendant")

engaged in unlawful employment practices on the basis of seJ[, in violation of the Civil Rights Act of

1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e, et seq. ("Title VII"). EEOC alleged that Defendant

discriminated against Charging Party Jeunifer James ("Charging Party") because of her pregnancy,

including discontinuing her management training, removing her from a managerial career track, denying

her work assignments, and terminating her employment. The Parties agree that it is in their mutual interests to fully resolve the matter without further

litigation. In consideration ofthe mutual promises, agreements and consideration contained herein,

EEOC and Defendant do hereby stipulate and consent to the entry of this Decree as final and binding

between the Parties and their successors or assigns. This Decree resolves all pregnancy discrimination claims presented by EEOC's Complaint and

1

Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10 Filed 06/01/2004 Page 2 of 15
Jennifer James' Charge No. 160-A2-00174 and constitutes a complete resolution of all claims of discrimination under Title VII in this Complaint that were made by the EEOC and Charging Party. This Decree in no way affects EEOC's right to process any future charges that may be filed against Defendant, including a charge filed by a member of the Commission (other than arising from Charging Party's charge which is the subject of this Decree), in accordance with EEOC procedures, and to commence civil actions on any such charges. Nothing in this Decree shall be construed to preclude EEOC from bringing proceedings to enforce this Decree in the event that Defendant fails to perform any of the promises and representations contained herein.
The Parties agree that this Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and the parties for the duration ofthis Decree, that venue is proper, and that all administrative prerequisites have been met all for purposes of entering and enforcing this Decree. The Parties further agree that this Decree maybe entered without Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law having been made and entered by the Court.
In consideration ofthe mutual promises of each party to this Decree, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, it is agreed and IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED AS FOLLOWS: 1 . In settlement of this action, Defendant shall pay a total of one hundred forty-five thousand
dollars ($145,000.00) to Charging Party Jennifer James. No part of this monetary amount shall be spent on the costs of implementing this Decree or for any other injunctive relief put forth in this Decree. This payment is to be made within twelve (12) business days ofthe entry ofthis Consent Decree. A copy of the check and any tax related documents shall be sent to EEOC at
2

Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10 Filed 06/01/2004 Page 3 of 15
the same time when they are sent to Charging Party. 2. Within twelve (12) business days ofthe entry of this Consent Decree, Defendant will provide
Charging Party the letter of recommendation attached as Exhibit A. 3. (a) By October 2004, Defendant will provide a three (3) hour anti-discrimination training for all
management personnel to be conducted by Jackson Lewis LLP or a suitable entity agreed to by the Parties. Once each year in calendar years 2005 and 2006, Defendant will provide a one and a half (1.5) hour refresher anti-discrimination training to be conducted by Jackson Lewis LLP or a suitable entity agreed to by the Parties for all management personnel who have already received the three (3) hour anti-discrimination training pursuant to paragraph (3)(a) of this Decree. Once each year in calendar years 2005 and 2006, Defendant will provide a three (3) hour anti-discrimination training to be conducted by Jackson Lewis LLP or a suitable entity agreed to by the Parties for all management personnel who have not previously received the three hour (3) anti-discrimination training pursuant to paragraph (3)(a) of this Decree.
(b) By October 2004, Defendant will provide an initial one (I) hour anti-discrimination training for non-management employees, who are hired by June 1,2004, to be conducted via an interactive computer program created by HRTRAIN. For non-management employees hired after June 1,2004, Defendant will provide such employees the same initial one (I) hour antidiscrimination training by October 2004 or within sixty (60) days oftheir hire, whichever is later. Once each year in calendar years 2005 and 2006, Defendant will again provide this interactive computer program to all non-management personnel. Alternatively, if agreed to by the EEOC, the training in years 2005 and 2006 for non-management employees, who have
3

Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10 Filed 06/01/2004 Page 4 of 15

already received the initial one (I) hour interactive computer training, may be a refresher program created by HRTRAIN whose content and duration are agreed to by the Parties.

(c) All training programs must be subject to the EEOC's approval. Within four (4) weeks of the entry ofthis Decree, Defendant is to provide the EEOC with its proposed interactive computer program. Within two weeks (2) of receipt of such proposed computer training program, the EEOC is to provide its response to Defendant. The EEOC will not unreasonably withhold its consent. However, ifthe EEOC objects to Defendant's proposed computer training program and Defendant does not address the EEOC's concerns within two weeks (2) of receipt of the EEOC's response, then the EEOC may seek appropriate relief from the Court.

(d) All training programs for management and non-management personnel specified in paragraphs 3(a) and 3(b) above should at a minimum cover the following: (a) a summary of the laws governing retaliation, sex discrimination, pregnancy discrimination, and sexual harassment; (b) examples of conduct prohibited under the applicable laws and Defendant's antidiscrimination policies; (c) case studies covering a variety of scenarios and a question/answer session; and (d) a summary of the procedures and policies that Defendant has instituted to prevent all forms of discrimination, including procedures regarding receiving, documenting and investigating claims of discrimination. Defendant will forward to EEOC a summary of the topics covered and a copy of the attendance sheet or participation list for each anti-discrimination training in October 2004 and every April and October of years 2005 and 2006.

4.

Within twelve (12) days of the entry ofthis Decree, Defendant shall post and maintain, in

4

Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10 Filed 06/01/2004 Page 5 of 15

employee break areas and places where employee notices are posted, the notice of nondiscrimination attached as Exhibit B.

5. Defendant will maintain the non-discrimination policy attached as Exhibit C.

6. At the time employees request or commence leave under the Family Medical Leave Act ("FMLA"), Defendant will provide such employees with a copy of its anti-discrimination policy, together with such other materials as may be provided under the FMLA.

7.

Defendant agrees to comply with all requirements of Title VII, including, but not limited to,

prohibitions concerning sex and pregnancy discrimination and retaliation.

8. Each party shall bear its own attorney fees and costs incurred in this action.

9. This Decree constitutes the complete understanding between the Parties hereto. No other promises or agreements shall be binding unless agreed to in writing and signed by the Parties. No waiver, modification or amendment or any provision of the Consent Decree

shall be effective unless made in writing, approved by all Parties to this Decree and approved by the Court or ordered by the Court.

10. This Decree, being entered with the consent of the EEOC and Defendant, shall not constitute an adjudication or finding on the merits of the case and shall not be construed as an admission of liability by Defendant, which denies liability.

11. If the EEOC determines that Defendant has not complied with the terms of this Decree, the EEOC will provide written notice of the alleged breach to Defendant. The EEOC will not

5

Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10 Filed 06/01/2004 Page 6 of 15

petition the Court for enforcement of this Decree for at least ten (10) business days after providing the written notice. The 10-business day period will be used by the Parties for good faith efforts to resolve the dispute. Any uncured breach of any tenn of this Decree shall be deemed a material breach of this Decree. 12. This Decree will remain in effect for a period of three years from the date of entry ofthis

Decree by the Court.
Dated: New York, New York ,2004

Dated: New York, New York

~ '):8

,2004

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Elizabeth Grossman Supervisory Trial Attorney

JACKSON LEWIS LL/'

BY~~-

Roger H. Briton

Attorney for Defendant 1000 'vVoodbttf)' RQae, !l'Mt@ 4Q2

S-8

So.:>l~J.y"lce

A/.
.

Woodbmy, NY 14797 Helvdle; AJ ,'I. 1I?tf/7

(516) 682-4289

(631).2 "7 - '/609

KarnS. Wong Trial Attorney New York District Office 33 Whitehall Street, 5th Floor New York, NY 10004-2112 Tel: (212) 336-3703 Fax: (212) 336-3623
U~~·
S()~E~~:.
V - "U V\j-
Arthur D. Spatt, S.DJ.

Date: _~l---ffl_fJ--"-_ i __ I

1I(lY0v1ArN, Tf'S3(CO"U/~~EL IS DIRECTED TO SERVE6A.
COpy OF THIS ORDER ON ALL PARTIES UPON RECEIPT.

Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10 Filed 06/01/2004 Page 7 of 15 A

Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10 Filed 06/01/2004 Page 8 of 15
[Defendant's Letterhead1
To Whom It May Concem: Ms. Jennifer James was employed from June 2000 until August 2001, first as a server and later assuming supervisory duties. Because of her performance, she was given the supervisory duties within a year ofthe start of her employment. The following information is provided from Ms. James' last performance evaluation dated July 25, 2001:
Ms. James has the potential to be a good leader. The stafflikes her and wants to follow her. She is good with the guests on the floor and has some great ideas to build sales in the restaurant. She has been proactive in identifying the staffing needs in the restaurant. She has good communication skills. She listens very well and hears what people are saying. She accepts criticism well and uses the feedback to her benefit and future growth.
Sincerely, [Signature of Highest Officer ofCompany1 Name of Highest Officer of Company Title of Highest Officer of Company

Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10 Filed 06/01/2004 Page 9 of 15

I

Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10 Filed 06/01/2004 Page 10 of 15
u.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION New York District Office 33 Whitehall Street, 11th Floor New York, New York 10004-2112 Telephone: (212) 336-3620 TDD: (212) 336-3622 General FAX: (212) 336-3625
NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES OF JOHN HARVARD'S BREW HOUSE, LLC
This notice is being posted pursuant to a Consent Decree entered into between John Harvard's Brew House, LLC and the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), in resolution of Case No. 03 3800 filed in the Eastern District Court of New York. In that lawsuit, EEOC alleged that John Harvard's Brew House, LLC violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, by engaging in pregnancy based sex discrimination against a female employee.
Federal law and the Consent Decree prohibit discrimination against any individual because of his or her sex in any and all aspects of the employment relationship, such as pay, promotion, assignments, hours, and any other terms, conditions or privileges of employment.
Federal law also prohibits retaliation against any individual by an employer because the individual complains of discrimination, cooperates with the government's investigation of a charge of discrimination, participates as a witness or potential witness in litigation, or otherwise exercises his or her rights under the law.
Should you have any complaints of discrimination, you may contact the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 33 Whitehall Street, 11th Floor New York, New York 10004-2112 (212) 336-3620 (800) 669-4000
THIS IS AN OFFICIAL NOTICE AND SHALL NOT BE DEFACED BY ANYONE.
This notice must remain posted until three years from the date of posting and may not be altered, defaced or covered by any other material.

Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10 Filed 06/01/2004 Page 11 of 15

Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10 Filed 06/01/2004 Page 12 of 15
EMPLOYEE GUIDEBOOK

E·MPLOYEE RELATIONS
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
It is the policy of John Harvard's Brew House to recruit, hire, train, and promote employees without discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, age, religion, national origin, disability, pregnancy, veteran status, or sexual orientation. This equal employment opportunity policy extends to all aspects of the employment relationship including hiring, compensation, promotions, job assignments and discipline. We are committed to training and advising those who are in a position to make decisions regarding hiring, salary administration and other terms and conditions of employment in the positive application of this policy. In addition, this policy will be made known to all employees of John Harvard's Brew House, all recruitment sources such as employment agencies and newspapers as well as all persons who come to John Harvard's Brew House. for the purpose of seeking employment.
HARASSMENT POLICY

The success of the company is based upon our fundamental commitment to treating our employees with equality, dignity and respect. Our support of equal employment opportunity includes the recognition that sexual harassment of employees or harassment of employees on account of gender, age, ral<e, color, religion, national origin, disability, pregnancy, ancestry, sexual orientation, marital, or veteran status, or any other legally protected status will not be tolerated. All of our employees have the right to be free from unwelcome sexual advances, or any other verbal or physical conduct, which constitutes harassment.
SEXUAL HARASSMENT
·Sexual Harassment of employees by supervisory personnel, non-supervisory personnel, guests, co- workers, or vendors, as well as harassment of our guests or vendors by employees, are unlawful and will not be tolerated. Further, any retaliation against an individual who has complained about sexual harassment or retaliation against individuals for cooperating with an investigation of a sexual harassment complaint is similarly unlawful and will not be tolerated. All members of management have the responsibility to maintain their respective workplace free of sexual harassment. This accountability includes communicating these guidelines to all employees and providing an environment where sexual harassment is not tolerated. Sexual harassment -whether on or off the job, during off-site work assignments, Company sponsored social functions, or elsewhere -will not be tolerated.
Sexual harassment is defined as "Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature when: 1) submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicilly a term or condition of an individual's employment, 2) submission or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual, or 3) such advances, requests or conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment."
While it is not possible to list all those circumstances and conduct that constitute sexual harassment, the following are some examples of conduct that may be prohibited: .Sexual advances whether or not they involve physical touching.
.Requests or demands for sexual favors in exchange for actual or promised job benefits, e.g. favorable reviews, assignments, promotions, increased benefits, or continued employment.
.Sexual jokes.

JHBH-2002

c
Employee Guidebook

Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10 Filed 06/01/2004 Page 13 of 15
EMPLOYEE GUIDEBOOK
Note:
Use of sexual language, epithets, flirtations, advances, or propositions. Leering, whistling, touching, pinching, or brushing the body. Written or oral references to sexual conduct, gossip about one's sex life, inquiries or comments about an individual's body, or about an individual's sexual activity or sexual orientation practices.
Comments about one's sexual activities.
Displays in the work place of sexually suggestive objects, pictures, posters, or cartoons.
Any conduct that creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.
Other Forms of Harassment
Harassment of employees on account of gender, age, race, color, religion, national origin, disability,pregnancy, ancestry, sexual orientation, marital, or veteran status, or any other legally protected status will not be tolerated. Harassment -whether on or off the job, during off-site work assignments, Company sponsored social functions, or elsewhere -will not be tolerated. For the purpose of this policy, harassment is defined as inappropriate conduct, either real or perceived, of a verbal or physical nature, which is generally based on a person's gender, race, color, disability, pregnancy, sexual preference, age, religion, national origin, or any other legally protected status. Examples of prohibited conduct include: .Verbal comments, inquiries, or remarks which are personally derogatory in nature, inappropriate or intended to be uncomplimentary relating to another person's gender, race, color, disability, pregnancy, sexual preference, age, religion, national origin, or any other legally protected status. Threats or insinuations from management or supervisory personnel, either stated or implied, that suggest that an employee's employment with the Company will be positively or negatively affected on account of gender, race, color, disability, pregnancy, sexual preference, age, religion, national origin, or any other legally protected status.
Any conduct that creates an intimidating, hostile, or offenSive working environment.
JHBH -2002
Employee Guidebook
-11

Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10 Filed 06/01/2004 Page 14 of 15
EMPLOYEE GUIDEBOOK

COMPLAINT PROCEDURE
The Company wants all employees to know that they are not required to endure insulting, degrading, or exploitive treatment. The Company also requires that each person exhibit in his/her conduct or communication, sound judgment and respect for every other employee, guest, and vendor of the Company. Employees have a right to file a complaint with the Company. Employees are urged to promptly bring a complaint of sexual harassment or any form of harassment or discrimination to the Company's attention. This may be done in writing or orally.

.Employees who feel comfortable doing so should inform the person(s) engaging in such harassment that the conduct is unwelcome, offensive, and that it must stop.

..Further, any employee who believes he/she is experiencing sexual harassment or any form of harassment or discrimination should report such circumstances to Company management immediately. This may be done in writing or orally.

.If the employee is not comfortable discussing the issue with an immediate supervisor or member of management,

the employee may file a complaint by contacting the Human Resources Department at the Company's Corporate

Headquarters (703 Granite Street, Braintree, MA -Telephone: (781) 356-4730). The Human Resources Department

is also available to discuss any concerns the employee may have or to provide information about the Company's

policy on harassment or discrimination.

.

.Any employee in a supervisory role who is informed of alleged harassment activities or discrimination occurring within the Company has the responsibility to immediately report such conduct to their immediate supervisor, or if not appropriate directly to the Human Resources Department at Corporate Headquarters.

.The Human Resources Department will, where warranted, investigate and attempt to resolve, in a timely and effective manner, all complaints of harassment or discrimination.

.AII information obtained during an investigation will be treated confidentially and will only be disclosed on a need-toknow basis in order to investigate and resolve the matter. Employees who disclose confidential information to unauthorized parties will be subject to disciplinary action, which may include termination .

.Investigations may include interviews with the complainant and witnesses, as well as the person alleged to have committed the harassment or discrimination.

.If sexual harassment or any form of harassment or discrimination is found to have occurred, it will not be tolerated and disciplinary action up to and including termination of employees who have violated this policy will occur. Employees may also file a formal complaint, in addition to, the complaint resolution procedures outlined in this policy. A person wishing to pursue other remedies may contact the appropriate government agencies.

Retaliation Prohibited
Neither the Company nor its supervisors or officers will in any way unlawfully retaliate against an employee or former employee who makes a good faith report of any type of harassment or participates in an investigation. It is the responsibility of all officers, managers, supervisors, and employees to strictly comply with and enforce the terms of this policy within their respective levels of responsibility.

JHBH -2002
Employee Guidebook
-12-

Case 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW Document 10 Filed 06/01/2004 Page 15 of 15
I
EMPLOYEE GUIDEBOOK
OPEN DOOR POLICY
Our success depends on mai\J.taining clear communications with all our employees. It is important to us to respond to a complaint, problem or anything you feel is unfair or unacceptable in any way and therefore, we advocate an open door policy.
We recognize that whenever people work closely together on a daily basis, some problems will inevitably arise. We believe that many of these problems can be settled quickly if they are simply brought to the appropriate person's attention. Accordingly, you should feel free to discuss any complaint or problem with your manager. If the complaint and problem is not resolved, it should be brought to the attention of the General Manager, and more senior management if necessary.
We recognize that there are times when problems arise that are of a private nature or may involve a subject that you do not wish to discuss with your manager. In these cases, you may bring the matter directly to the attention of any senior member of management, such as the General Manager or the Human Resources Director, who will respond promptly. No employee will be penalized or retaliated against in any way for bringing up a problem or registering a complaint.
JHBH -2002
Employee Guidebook
.13-

 
 Eastern District of New York - Live Database Version 3.0.5 Release - Docket Report

Page 1 of 3

U.S. District Court Eastern District of New York (Central Islip) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:03-cv-03800-ADS-WDW

CLOSED

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. John Harvard's Brew House, LLC Assigned to: Senior-Judge Arthur D. Spatt Referred to: Magistrate-Judge William D. Wall Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)

Date Filed: 08/05/2003 Date Terminated: 06/01/2004 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Kam Sau Wong Equal Employment Opportunity Commission NY District Office 33 Whitehall Street 5th Floor New York, NY 10004 212-336-3703 Fax: 212-336-3623 Email: kam.wong@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant John Harvard's Brew House, LLC

represented by John M. Mc Kelway Gadsby Hannah LLP 225 Franklin Street Boston, Ma 02110 617 345 7000 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Roger H. Briton Jackson Lewis, LLP 58 South Service Road Suite 410 Melville, NY 11747 631-247-4609 Fax: 631-247-0417 Email: britonr@jacksonlewis.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

https://ecf.nyed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?108310071097381-L_353_0-1

6/6/2007

Eastern District of New York - Live Database Version 3.0.5 Release - Docket Report

Page 2 of 3

Date Filed 08/05/2003 10/17/2003 10/30/2003 10/31/2003
01/08/2004 01/12/2004 03/25/2004
04/14/2004
04/28/2004

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT against John Harvard's Brew House, LLC No summons issued, filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Romano, Daniel) Modified on 8/6/2003 (Romano, Daniel). (Entered: 08/06/2003)

2 STIPULATION AND ORDER Extending Deft's Time To Answer; That the date by which Deft must serve an Answer to the Complaint is hereby extended to 10/22/03.( Signed by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 10/17/03.) c/m (Fagan, Linda) (Entered: 10/24/2003)

4 PROPOSED STIPULATION AND ORDER extending dft's time to answer. (Coleman, Laurie) (Entered: 11/21/2003)

3 STIPULATION EXTENDING DFT'S TIME TO ANSWER - The date by which Dft must serve and answer to the complaint is extended to 12/19/03. Final Extension. Mr. Briton is directed to serve a copy of this order on all parties upon receipt. (Signed by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 10/28/03). C/M(Coleman, Laurie) Modified on 11/21/2003 (Coleman, Laurie). (Entered: 11/21/2003)

5 STIPULATION AND ORDER - The date by which dft must serve an Answer to the Complaint is extended to 1/23/04. Mr. Briton is directed to serve a copy of this order on all parties upon receipt. (Signed by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 1/8/04). C/M(Coleman, Laurie) (Entered: 02/03/2004)

6 ANSWER to 1 Complaint by John Harvard's Brew House, LLC. (Coleman, Laurie) (Entered: 04/14/2004)

8 Letter from Roger H. Briton to United States District Court Clerk, dated 3/23/04 re: To advise that, effective 3/1/04, the Jackson Lewis Long Island office has relocated to: 58 South Service Road, Suite 410, Melville, New York 11747, Phone (631) 247-0404, Fax: (631) 247-0417. (Fagan, Linda) (Entered: 04/22/2004)

7 NOTICE dated 4/14/04 to Kam Sau Wong, Esq. Re: There having been no activity in this case since 1/8/04, pltff's counsel is requested to inform the Court, on or before 4/29/04, why an order should not be entered dismissing this action for failure to prosecute. (Signed by Mary Ellen Schaffner, Deputy Clerk to Judge Spatt, on 4/14/04). (Coleman, Laurie) (Entered: 04/15/2004)

9 LETTER dated 4/27/04 from Kam Wong to Judge Spatt Re: In response to the Court's Notice regarding why an order should not be entered dismissing EEOC's action against John Harvard's Brew House. On 12/22/03, the parties agreed on the terms of a Consent Decree to submit to the Court for approval. The only outstanding issue has been dft's need to identify an appropriate anti-discrimination on-line training for EEOC's review and approval, which will then be incorporated into the terms of the Decree. EEOC requests that the Court not dismiss its Complaint, and that a telephonic conference with either your Honor of Magistrate Judge Wall be set in two weeks time regarding finalization of this training

https://ecf.nyed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?108310071097381-L_353_0-1

6/6/2007

Eastern District of New York - Live Database Version 3.0.5 Release - Docket Report

Page 3 of 3

04/29/2004 06/01/2004

issue. (Coleman, Laurie) (Entered: 05/05/2004)
11 MINUTE ENTRY before Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 4/29/04 @ 2:40 p.m., for Civil Cause for Telephone Conference. Counsel for all sides present. Court Reporter: Perry Auerbach. Case called. Conference held. Other: Re: Letter from Mr. Wong. Parties have until 6/1/04 to consummate Settlement. If no Settlement by then, a conference will be scheduled before Magistrate Judge Wall on 6/2/04. Time left open. (Coleman, Laurie) (Entered: 06/15/2004)
10 CONSENT DECREE - In settlement of this action, Dft shall pay a total of $145,000.00 to Charging Party Jennifer James. No part of this money shall be spent on the costs of implementing this Decree or for any other injunctive relief put forth in this Decree. This payment is to be made within twelve business days of the entry of this Consent Decree. The parties agree that this Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and the parties for the duration of this Decree, that venue is proper, and that all administrative prerequisites have been met for purposes of entering and enforcing this Decree. The Parties further agree that this Decree may be entered without Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law having been made and entered by the Court. Case Closed. (Signed by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 6/1/04). C/M(Coleman, Laurie) Additional attachment(s) added on 6/3/2004 (Coleman, Laurie). (Entered: 06/03/2004)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt

06/06/2007 14:35:03

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code: eeoc

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

2:03-cv-03800-ADSWDW

Billable Pages: 2

Cost:

0.16

https://ecf.nyed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?108310071097381-L_353_0-1

6/6/2007

 
 EEOC Sues John Harvard's Brew House For Pregnancy Discrimination

Page 1 of 2

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 6, 2003

CONTACT:

TTY:

Larry Pincus Public Affairs (212) 336-3667 Kam S. Wong Trial Attorney (212) 336-3703 Elizabeth Grossm Supervisory Tria (212) 336-3696 (212) 336-3622

EEOC Sues John Harvard's Brew House For Pregnancy Discrimination

Charging Party Jennifer James (center) is pictured with her baby. Standing next to her are EEOC Trial Attorney Kam Wong (right) and private counsel James A. Brown (left)
Expecting Mother Forced to Choose Between Parenthood and Livelihood, Suit Says
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today filed a pregnancy discrimination lawsuit in federal district court against John Harvard's Brew House, a restaurant and brewery business operating in nine states with a local branch in Lake Grove, Long Island.
The EEOC's suit, Civil Action No.03- CV-3800, filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, charges that John Harvard's Brew House discriminated against Jennifer James once she informed its management that she was pregnant. Ms. James' career had advanced rapidly from a starting position of Server, to Supervisor, and to Manager-in-training. However, as soon as she informed the company of her pregnancy, her career abruptly ended. She was told to "consider her options." When she insisted on continuing with her pregnancy, her management training was discontinued and she was ultimately terminated from her employment in August 2001.
Remarking on her case, Ms. James said: "I am very appreciative that the EEOC has chosen to file a lawsuit on my behalf to correct a terrible wrong. I was always told how joyous it was to become a mother. Rather than experience joy, I felt only fear, and like a failure, as my career was terminated."

http://www.eeoc.gov/press/8-06-03.html

6/6/2007

EEOC Sues John Harvard's Brew House For Pregnancy Discrimination

Page 2 of 2

EEOC filed the lawsuit after its efforts to voluntarily conciliate the matter without litigation proved futile. The suit seeks monetary relief, an order requiring the company to implement policies and procedures against discrimination, and a permanent injunction against discrimination. This case was investigated by the Newark Area Office, due to the transfer of files after the destruction of the New York District Office on September 11, 2001.
"The EEOC takes very seriously allegations of pregnancy discrimination," said Katherine Bissell, the EEOC's Regional Attorney in New York. "No employee should ever be forced to choose between parenthood and a livelihood. The EEOC will continue to vigorously pursue such cases."
Spencer H. Lewis, EEOC's New York District Director, added: "Employers should be aware that they cannot discriminate based on pregnancy or sex. Employment decisions motivated by sex based stereotypes cannot be sanctioned."
In addition to enforcing Title VII, as amended, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex (including sexual harassment or pregnancy) or national origin and protects employees who complain about such offenses from retaliation, the EEOC enforces the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, which protects workers age 40 and older from discrimination based on age; the Equal Pay Act of 1963, which prohibits gender-based wage discrimination; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits employment discrimination against people with disabilities in the federal sector; 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; and sections of the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Further information about the Commission is available on the agency's web site at www.eeoc.gov.
This page was last modified on August 6, 2003.
Return to Home Page

http://www.eeoc.gov/press/8-06-03.html

6/6/2007

 
 EEOC LITIGATION SETTLEMENT REPORT - June 2004

Page 1 of 1

z EEOC v. John Harvard's Brew House, Inc. No. 03-cv-3800 (E.D.N.Y. June 1, 2004)
In this Title VII/PDA action, the New York District Office alleged that defendant, a restaurant and brewery business operating in nine states, discriminated against charging party because of her pregnancy. Defendant hired CP as a server in June 2000. By May 2001, she had been promoted to a supervisor and elevated to a management career path. Once CP informed defendant of her pregnancy, however, defendant took adverse employment actions against her: discontinuing her management training, removing her from the managerial career track, denying her work assignments, and ultimately terminating her employment. Pursuant to a three-year consent decree, defendant agreed to pay $145,000 to CP and to provide her with a letter of recommendation that described her assumption of supervisory duties and quoted positive language from her last performance appraisal. Additionally, the decree requires defendant to maintain a revised non-discrimination policy and provide each employee requesting leave under the FMLA to be provided a copy of such non-discrimination policy.

http://www.eeoc.gov/litigation/settlements/settlement06-04.html

6/6/2007

 
 Office of General Counsel FY 2004 Annual Report - Summary of Accomplishments

Page 1 of 1

d. Pregnancy Discrimination
One of the larger societal changes in the 40 years since the passage of Title VII is the entry of women into the work force at all stages of childbearing and rearing. A woman hired as a server at a nine-state restaurant/brewery chain and promoted to supervisor and put on the management career path found that path blocked when she told her employer she was pregnant. Her management training was discontinued, she was removed from the management career track, and she was denied assignments and ultimately discharged. This case was settled for $145,000, a positive letter of reference, and revised employment policies. EEOC v. John Harvard's Brew House, Inc. (E.D.N.Y. June 1, 2004). In another case, one of the nation's largest aftermarket autoparts retailers refused to let a pregnant assistant manager continue working after her doctor had imposed a pregnancy-related 30- pound lifting restriction on her. Evidence revealed that employees with temporary lifting restrictions not related to pregnancy had been permitted to work. EEOC v. O'Reilly Automotive, Inc., d/b/a O'Reilly Auto Parts (D. Kan. June 16, 2004) ($50,000 in backpay and damages and a positive letter of reference).

http://www.eeoc.gov/litigation/04annrpt/index.html

6/6/2007