1

2

3

4

5

6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

7

8 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

)

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

)

9

Plaintiff, )

v.

)

10

)

RLS, Inc., dba SEBO’S DO-IT-CENTER )

11

)

Defendant. )

12

)

CIVIL NO. COMPLAINT JURY TRIAL DEMAND

13

NATURE OF THE ACTION

14

This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) and Title I of

15 the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex and to

16 provide appropriate relief to Gloria Crouch and a group of similarly situated female employees (“the

17 class”) who were adversely affected by such practices. The Equal Employment Opportunity

18 Commission alleges that Defendant RLS, Inc., dba SEBO’s Do-It-Center (“SEBO’s” or

19 “Defendant”) subjected Ms. Crouch and the class to a sexually hostile work environment. The

20 EEOC further alleges this sexually hostile work environment led to the constructive termination of

21 Ms. Crouch. Plaintiff seeks injunctive and monetary relief, including pecuniary and nonpecuniary

22 compensatory damages and punitive damages, on behalf of Ms. Bernhardt and the class.

23

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

24

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

25 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to sections 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII

COMPLAINT - Page 1

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Seattle District Office 909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061 Telephone: (206) 220-6883 Facsimile: (206) 220-6911 TDD: (206) 220-6882

1 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3) (“Title VII”), and

2 Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a.

3

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

4 jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington.

5

PARTIES

6

3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), is

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

8 enforcement of Title VII and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Sections 706(f)(1) and

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

10

4. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been a corporation doing business

11 in the State of Washington and has continuously had at least 15 employees.

12

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

13 industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections and Sections 701(b), (g) and (h) of Title

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

15

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

16

6. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Gloria Crouch filed a

17 charge of discrimination with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by Defendant. All

18 conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.

19

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

20 practices at its facility in Clinton, Washington in violation of Section 703(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C.

21 § 2000e-2(a). Defendant affected the terms and conditions of Ms. Crouch’s and the class members’

22 employment by subjecting them to sexual harassment. Further, this sexually hostile work

23 environment led to the constructive termination of Ms. Crouch.

24

8. The effect of the practice(s) complained of in paragraph 7 above has been to deprive

25 Ms. Crouch and class members of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect

COMPLAINT - Page 2

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Seattle District Office 909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061 Telephone: (206) 220-6883 Facsimile: (206) 220-6911 TDD: (206) 220-6882

1 their status as employees because of their sex.

2

9. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 7 above were and

3 are intentional.

4

10. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 7 above were and

5 are done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Ms. Crouch

6 and the other class members.

7

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

8

Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:

9

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

10 assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from engaging in any employment

11 practices that discriminate on the basis of sex.

12

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

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

14 present unlawful employment practices.

15

C. Order Defendant to make whole Ms. Crouch and all other class members by providing

16 appropriate back pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be proved at trial, and other

17 affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices.

18

D. Order Defendant to make whole Ms. Crouch and all other class members by providing

19 compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices

20 described in paragraphs 7-10, including without limitation past and future out-of-pocket expenses,

21 in amounts to be determined at trial.

22

E. Order Defendant to make whole Ms. Crouch and all other class members by providing

23 compensation for past and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices

24 described in paragraphs 7-10, including without limitation emotional pain, suffering, loss of

25 enjoyment of life and humiliation in amounts to determined at trial.

COMPLAINT - Page 3

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Seattle District Office 909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061 Telephone: (206) 220-6883 Facsimile: (206) 220-6911 TDD: (206) 220-6882

1

F. Order Defendant to pay Ms. Crouch and all other class members punitive damages

2 for its malicious and/or reckless conduct described in paragraphs 7-10 above in an amount to be

3 determined at trial.

4

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

5 interest.

6

H. Award the Commission its costs of this action.

7 //

8 //

9 //

10 //

11 //

12 //

13 //

14 //

15 //

16 //

17 //

18 //

19 //

20 //

21 //

22 //

23 //

24 //

25 //

COMPLAINT - Page 4

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Seattle District Office 909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061 Telephone: (206) 220-6883 Facsimile: (206) 220-6911 TDD: (206) 220-6882

1

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

2

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

3

DATED this

day of

, 2004.

4 A. LUIS LUCERO, JR.
5 Regional Attorney

6 JOHN F. STANLEY Supervisory Trial Attorney
7 WESLEY KATAHIRA
8 Senior Trial Attorney

9 BY:
10

/S/ A. Luis Lucero

ERIC S. DREIBAND General Counsel
JAMES L. LEE Deputy General Counsel
GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel

11 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
12 Seattle District Office 909 First Avenue, Suite 400
13 Seattle, Washington 98104 Telephone (206) 220-6918
14 Wesley.Katahira@eeoc.gov

Office of the General Counsel 1801 "L" Street NW Washington, D.C. 20507

15

16

Attorneys for Plaintiff

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

COMPLAINT - Page 5

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Seattle District Office 909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061 Telephone: (206) 220-6883 Facsimile: (206) 220-6911 TDD: (206) 220-6882

 
 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

The Honorable Judge Ricardo S. Martinez

8

10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

12

AT SEATTLE

13

14

GLORIA CROUCH,

NO. C04-2066RSM

15

INTERVENER’S

Plaintiff, AMENDED

16

SUPPLEMENTAL

vs. 17

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR

18

RLS, Inc., dba SEBO’S DO-IT CENTER,

HARASSMENT AND DISCRIMINATION WITH

19

Defendants. JURY DEMAND

20

21

COMES NOW, the above-referenced Plaintiff, by and through attorney of record,

22 PETER MOOTE, and alleges as causes of action in this first Amended Supplemental Complaint
23 against the Defendants named herein and above as follows: 24
I. PARTIES 25
1.1 Plaintiff , GLORIA CROUCH, resides in Island County. 26
1.2 Defendant, RLS, Inc., dba SEBO’S DO-IT CENTER, is a domestic corporation
INTERVENER'S AMENDED SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES - 1

1 doing business in the State of Washington. It had authority to take all actions alleged herein and
2 did take such actions by way of its agents and/or employees. This corporate Defendant is
3 responsible for all liability caused by its employees and managers under the doctrine of respondeat
4
5 superior.

6

1.3 Plaintiff believes and, therefore, alleges that other persons or entities presently

7 not known may be responsible for the allegations and damages alleged herein. Plaintiff is

8 designating said Defendants pursuant to RCW 4.28.150 and reserves the right to specifically
10 amend the Complaint to name such parties should their identity become known to Plaintiff. 11
Plaintiff presently designates them as John Doe and Jane Doe, I - III. 12
1.4 Alternative Hypothetical Pleading. Pursuant to Civil Rule 8(e)(2), Plaintiff 13 14 pleads hypothetically against Defendants that in the event, and only in the event, that any
15 Defendant attempts to avoid joint and several liability for the injuries, claims and causes of action

16 set forth herein under RCW 4.22.070, that this said Defendant or some other Defendant 's

17 negligence was a proximate cause of the injuries and causes of action alleged herein, then Plaintiff

18 makes the same claims against the other alleged Defendants or alleged persons or entities as are

19 made against the Defendants in this action. The Judgment sought herein would then also be
20 claimed against said additional Defendants jointly and severally.
21

22

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

23

2.1 The above-referenced Court has subject matter and personal jurisdiction of the

24 actions alleged herein and the parties hereto.

25

26

INTERVENER'S AMENDED SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES - 2

1

2.2 The above-referenced Court is the proper venue for this action.

2 2.3 Plaintiff exhausted her efforts to obtain administrative help. She filed a Complaint
3 with the EEOC under Charge No.380-2004-00787 . The EEOC has decided to act on the
4

5 complaint and has filed an action against the same Defendants in Cause No. C04-2066RSM

6 alleging Title VII and 42 USCA 2000e violations.

7

2.4 This Plaintiff is filing a Motion to Intervene as authorized under 42 USCA 2000e-

8 5(f)(1) and FRCP 24. The Motion to Intervene and this Complaint are timely filed.

10

2.5 Demand for a jury of twelve is hereby made.

11 2.6 Damages are in excess of $250,000.00.
12 III. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
13

14

3.1 GLORIA CROUCH is a resident of Island County, Washington. She is an

15 individual residing in Island County, Washington.

16

3.2 The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants commencing in 2001 as a sales

17 associate.

18

3.3 During the course of her employment, she was subjected to pervasive, unwanted

19 and offensive sexual conduct that was inappropriate and shocking to the conscience of a
20 reasonable woman. The conduct was committed by her direct manager.
21

22

3.4 The Defendants were aware of, or should have been aware of, the offensive and

23 wrongful sexual harassment and failed to take effective prompt remedial action to protect the

24 Plaintiff and other women working for Defendants.

25

3.5 No reasonable woman could be expected to continue to work under such

26

INTERVENER'S AMENDED SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES - 3

1 conditions that interfered in her ability to perform the essential functions of her job.
2 3.6 The Plaintiff was unable to continue working under such conditions and was
3 forced to discontinue the employment to her financial and personal detriment. She was wrongfully
4
5 constructively terminated.

6

IV. CAUSES OF ACTION

7

4.1 Sexual Harassment/Hostile Work Environment. Plaintiff is a female and a

8 member of this protected class. Plaintiff was subjected to unwelcomed sexual and abusive
10 conduct that caused her emotional distress, anxiety, fear and humiliation. The Plaintiff was 11
offended by the wrongful sexual harassment of the Defendants . The wrongful sexual conduct 12
occurred during work-required duties and interfered with her ability to perform her work and 13 14 created a hostile or abusive work environment. Plaintiff gave notice of the sexual harassment to
15 the employer and the agents of the employer. The employer had advance notice of the abusive and

16 wrongful conduct and failed to take prompt remedial action to correct it in a reasonable manner.

17 The wrongful sexual harassment was committed against the Plaintiff by her direct manager. As a
18 consequence of this failure to take remedial action, Plaintiff was left to suffer such abusive 19
conduct. These actions constitute sexual harassment, quid pro quo harassment and creation of a 20
hostile work environment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 1991, 42 21 22 U.S.C., Section 2000e and the Washington Law Against Discrimination, RCW 49.60.030, 180 et
23 seq.

24

4.2 Disparate Treatment Violations. Plaintiff was discriminated against and harassed for

25 civil rights violations that were caused by wrongful disparate treatment by the Defendants. These 26 conditions are in violation of anti-discrimination laws found in Title VII of the Civil

INTERVENER'S AMENDED SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES - 4

1 Rights Act of 1964 and 1991, 42 U.S.C., Section 2000e and the Washington Law Against 2
Discrimination, RCW 49.60.030, 180 et seq. and other authority cited in this action. 3
4.3 Breach of Contract/Wrongful Termination. Plaintiff has written, verbal, and implied 4 5 contractual terms of employment to be protected from wrongful and unsafe conduct in the work
6 place. Defendants breached these contractual terms of employment and are liable to Plaintiff in

7 equity and in damages at law in amounts to be proven at trial. The wrongful conduct resulted in a

8 wrongful constructive termination of the Plaintiff.

10

4.4 Public Policy and Common Law. The actions of the Defendants violated public

11 policy and common law protections against discrimination or other tortious and outrageous
12 conduct in the State of Washington. The wrongful sexual harassment perpetrated against Plaintiff
13

14 amounts to violation of employment and personal and civil rights and were in violation of

15 Thompson v. St. Regis Paper Co., 102 Wn.2d 219 (1984) and Dicomes v. Washington,

16 113 Wn.2d 612 (1989) and Moorpark v. Superior Court for Ventura County, 18 Cal4th 1143,

17 959 P.2d 752 (1998).

18

4.5 Infliction of Emotional Distress. As a direct and proximate result of the actions

19 alleged herein by the Defendants, Plaintiff has suffered intentional and/or negligent infliction of
20 emotional distress. Defendants knew or should have known the actions being taken would cause
21

22 emotional distress. Any reasonable person would know the actions and conduct alleged herein

23 would cause emotional distress to another. The Defendants had a duty to refrain from such

24 actions or to stop such actions when they became aware of such actions and failed to do so. As a

25 direct and proximate result, the Plaintiff has suffered damages in amounts to be proven at trial. 26

INTERVENER'S AMENDED SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES - 5

1

4.6 Outrage. The conduct and actions of the Defendants as set forth herein were so

2 outrageous in character and so contrary to law and society as to exceed all possible bounds of
3 human decency. The actions of these Defendants were so outrageous as to be totally intolerable
4

5 in a civilized community. As a result of the outrageous conduct, there was an infliction of severe

6 harm and emotional distress to the Plaintiff. Such harm and distress is wrongful in the State of

7 Washington and subjects the Defendants to all damages causally related thereto of a general and

8 special nature. The amounts of these damages will be proven at trial.

10

4.7 Negligent Supervision and Training. The actions of the Defendants were negligent in

11 training, managing and supervising their managers, supervisors, employees and agents. The
12 Defendants were aware of or should have been aware of the discriminatory and harassing actions
13

14 of their managers and supervisors and employees and the failures of their managers to correct the

15 wrongful conduct. As a direct and proximate result of such negligent supervision and

16 management, Plaintiff has suffered general and special damages.

17

4.8 Punitive Damages. The actions of the Defendants were so reckless and indifferent to

18 the rights of the Plaintiff as to constitute justification for award of punitive damages allowed
19 under the legal authority set forth herein and Kolstad v. American Dental Association, 527 U.S.
20 526 (1999) and Bruso v. United Airlines, Inc., 00-1699 (7th Cir., 2001). Further authority is
21
22 found in the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Punitive damages are prayed for.

23

V. RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR/VICARIOUS LIABILITY

24

5.1 Defendants are liable for all actions of their managers and employees under the

25 Doctrine of Respondeat Superior. The conduct of these employees, managers, and agents was 26

INTERVENER'S AMENDED SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES - 6

1 implicitly ratified by the employer making the employer liable for the wrongful conduct. Lehmann 2
v. Toys R Us, 133 NJ 587, 626 A2d 445 (1993). 3
5.2 Defendants are vicariously liable for the actions of their managers, supervisors, agents 4 5 and employees under the doctrine of vicarious liability. Alexander v. Alcatel Cable Systems,
6 (4th Cir., Oct., 2002) Lexis 21498; Paroline v. Unisys Corporation, 879 F.2d 100 (4th Cir., 1989) and

7 Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998) and in Snyder v. Med. Servs. Corp. of

8 E. Wash., 145 Wn.2d 233, 242-43, 35 P.3d 1158 (2001).

10

VI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

11

1. Special Damages. Loss of earning capacity; past and future loss of wages and benefits

12 of employment; medical treatment and other compensatory and special damages as proven at the
13

time of trial. 14

15

2. General Damages. Emotional distress, psychological impairment, loss of enjoyment of

16 life, mental health impairment/disability and civil rights violations in amounts proven at trial.

17

3. Attorneys' Fees and Costs. All reasonable attorneys' fees, including contingent

18 attorneys' fees, and all costs of Plaintiff's should be awarded as a damage Judgment against

19 Defendants.
20 4. Punitive Damages. Punitive damages should be assessed against the Defendants in
21
22 amounts determined appropriate at trial.

23

5. Taxes and Interest. Defendants are liable for payment of the taxes of the Plaintiff and

24 interest on certain damages awarded.

25

6. Other Relief. The Court should award such other and further relief as deemed

26 appropriate, equitable or just.

INTERVENER'S AMENDED SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES - 7

1

DATED this 9th day of February, 2005.

2 /s/

3

PETER MOOTE

State Bar No. 6098

4

Peter Moote Law Firm

5

P.O. Box 625 Freeland, WA 98249

6

Telephone: (360) 331-4961

Fax: (360) 331-7755

7

E-mail: moote@petermoote.com

8

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

INTERVENER'S AMENDED SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES - 8

 
 1

Hon. Ricardo S. Martinez

2

3

4

5

6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
8 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
9 COMMISSION,

10

Plaintiff,

Case No. 04-2066-RSM

11

and

12 GLORIA CROUCH,
13
Intervenor, 14

CONSENT DECREE [PROPOSED]

15

v.

16 RLS, INC., dba SEBO’S DO-IT-CENTER,

17

Defendant.

18 I. INTRODUCTION
19 1. This action originated with a charge of employment discrimination
20 filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“the Commission”) on
21 March 19, 2004 by Gloria Crouch (“Charge”). The Charge alleged that RLS, Inc.
22
23 d/b/a SEBO’s Do-It-Center (“the Company”) subjected Crouch to sexual

24 harassment by Frank Parra, co-owner and manager, because of her gender and

25 defendant’s failure to promptly remedy Parra’s sexual harassment forced her to 26

27 28
Consent Decree - Page 1

E Q U A L E M P L O YM E N T O PP O R T UN IT Y C O M M I SS IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building
909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061
Telephone (206) 220-6883 Fax (206) 220-6911 TDD (206) 220-6882

1 constructively discharge her employment at the Company in violation of Title VII of

2 the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e (“Title VII”). EEOC found

3 reasonable cause to believe the Charge to be true and that there were other female
4 employees who were similarly sexually harassed by Parra. The Company denies
5
that it discriminated against Ms. Crouch or any other employee in any manner. 6

7

2. Following the issuance of a Letter of Determination and the failure of

8 conciliation efforts, the Commission filed a lawsuit under Title VII against the

9 Company on September 1, 2004.

10

3. The parties want to conclude the claims arising out of the charge, the

11 Commission’s determination with regard to the charge, and the lawsuit arising from
12
the charge, without expending further resources in contested litigation. 13

14

II. NONADMISSION OF LIABILITY AND

15

NONDETERMINATION BY THE COURT

16

4. This Consent Decree is not an adjudication or finding on the merits of

17 this case and shall not be construed as an admission by the Company of a violation

18 of any law.
19

III. SETTLEMENT SCOPE 20

21

5. This Consent Decree is the final and complete resolution of all

22 allegations of unlawful employment practices included in the Charge, in the

23 Commission’s Letter of Determination and in the Commission’s complaint filed in
24 the case that were or could have been brought based on the administrative charge,
25 including all individual and all class claims, as well as claims by the parties for
26

27 28
Consent Decree - Page 2

E Q U A L E M P L O YM E N T O PP O R T UN IT Y C O M M I SS IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building
909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061
Telephone (206) 220-6883 Fax (206) 220-6911 TDD (206) 220-6882

1 attorney fees and costs. The injunctive relief provisions of this Consent Decree

2 apply to the Company’s Clinton, Washington store and are final and binding as to
3 all such issues and claims.
4 IV. MONETARY RELIEF
5 6. In settlement of this suit, the Company agrees to pay One Hundred
6
7 Twenty Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($120,000) to Ms. Crouch in settlement

8 and satisfaction of all claims for monetary relief which were or could have been

9 asserted in the case by her. Payment of settlement proceeds to Ms. Crouch will be

10 made in the following manner:

11 a. The Company agrees to pay $120,000 in cash by not later than
12
September 14, 2005. 13

14

b. Ms. Crouch and the Company may enter into a private release

15

agreement to which the EEOC will not be a party.

16

c. Upon receipt by the Company of the signed release

17

agreement, the Company shall issue a check to Ms. Crouch in the

18 amount of $120,000 and issue to her a Form 1099.
19 d. Within 5 days of mailing the check, the Company will verify the
20

mailing by providing to the EEOC copy of the check and a Declaration 21

22

of an appropriate Company official attesting that the Company mailed

23

the check in compliance with the Decree.

24

e. Ms. Crouch bears the ultimate responsibility for the tax

25 consequences of the payments received.
26

27 28
Consent Decree - Page 3

E Q U A L E M P L O YM E N T O PP O R T UN IT Y C O M M I SS IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building
909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061
Telephone (206) 220-6883 Fax (206) 220-6911 TDD (206) 220-6882

1

V. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

2 A. General Provisions
3 7. The Company reaffirms its commitment to continue to comply with the
4 requirements of Title VII and all other federal laws against discrimination in its
5
6 employment decisions. To further this commitment, it shall monitor its affirmative

7 obligations under this Consent Decree.

8

8. The Company shall not retaliate against any current or former

9 employee for opposing any practice made unlawful by Title VII. Nor shall the

10 Company retaliate against any current or former employee for making a charge or
11 for testifying, assisting, or participating in any investigation, proceeding, or hearing
12
associated with the case. 13

14

9. The Company will not disclose any information or make references to

15 any charge of discrimination or this lawsuit in responding to requests for information

16 about Ms. Crouch. The Company agrees to provide a positive reference of

17 employment for Ms. Crouch to any prospective, future employer to whom she may

18 apply.
19

B. Policies Designed to Prevent Harassment and Discrimination 20

21

10. The Company agrees that it shall impose reasonable discipline -- up

22 to and including termination of employment, suspension without pay or demotion --

23 upon any supervisor or manager who engages in discrimination, sexually harasses
24 any employee or who retaliates against any person who complains or participates
25 in any investigation or proceeding concerning any such conduct. The Company
26

27 28
Consent Decree - Page 4

E Q U A L E M P L O YM E N T O PP O R T UN IT Y C O M M I SS IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building
909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061
Telephone (206) 220-6883 Fax (206) 220-6911 TDD (206) 220-6882

1 shall communicate this policy to all of its supervisors and managers.

2

11. The Company agrees that it shall advise all managers and supervisors

3 of their duty to ensure compliance with the Company’s EEO policy, and to report
4 any incidents and/or complaints of discrimination, harassment or retaliation of
5
which they become aware. Consistent with this commitment, within ninety (90) 6

7 days after entry of this Decree by the Court, the Company shall engage a third

8 party to act as its “EEO coordinator” to be responsible for all aspects of the

9 Company’s EEO policy and complaint process, which shall have training and

10 experience in EEO management. If during the ninety day period the Company is
11 unable to identify and contract with an appropriate third party EEO coordinator, it
12 shall immediately notify the EEOC. The EEO coordinator will ensure that all
13
14 managers and employees understand these procedures and policies.

15

12. The Company agrees to revise its employee appraisal process to

16 include “commitment to equal employment opportunity” as a criterion for

17 qualification and performance evaluation for employees holding supervisory

18 positions.

19
C. 20

21

13.

Training Within the first six (6) months following entry of this decree, the

22 Company will ensure at least six (6) hours of employment discrimination training,

23 including training on sexual harassment, is provided annually each year of the

24 decree for all managers and employees in the Company’s locations covered by this 25
Consent Decree. The Company will provide the training program plan and materials 26

27 28
Consent Decree - Page 5

E Q U A L E M P L O YM E N T O PP O R T UN IT Y C O M M I SS IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building
909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061
Telephone (206) 220-6883 Fax (206) 220-6911 TDD (206) 220-6882

1 within ninety (90) days after entry of this Decree.

2

14. The Company will notify the EEOC of the completion of the training

3 and will specify the names and job titles of the employees who participated in and
4 completed the training as part of its annual reporting to the EEOC.
5

6

D. Reporting

7

15. Six (6) months after entry of this Consent Decree and every six (6)

8 months for the term of this Consent Decree, the Company shall provide a report to

9 the Commission on the Company’s compliance with the Consent Decree. The
10 Compliance Report shall include the following: 11
(a) a summary of complaints of sexual harassment, if any, in any 12
facility covered by this Decree and any resulting internal investigations conducted 13
14 pursuant to the Company’s anti-discrimination policies during the preceding six-
15 month period. The report will describe the resolution of each complaint;

16

(b) certification that the Company completed six (6) hours of EEO

17 training for managers and employees within the first six (6) months following entry
18 of this decree and six (6) hours of training annually for each year thereafter for the
19 duration of this decree. The Company will provide the lists of attendees for all such
20
21 training;

22

(c) copies of the attendee lists, evaluations, and materials for all

23 training required by this Decree.

24

If the Company has not complied with any term of the Consent Decree, the

25 Company shall provide a statement specifying the areas of noncompliance, the
26

27 28
Consent Decree - Page 6

E Q U A L E M P L O YM E N T O PP O R T UN IT Y C O M M I SS IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building
909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061
Telephone (206) 220-6883 Fax (206) 220-6911 TDD (206) 220-6882

1 reason(s) for the noncompliance, and the steps taken to bring the Company into

2 compliance.
3 VI. ENFORCEMENT
4 16. The United States District Court for the Western District of
5 Washington shall retain jurisdiction over this matter for the duration of the Consent
6
7 Decree. If the Commission concludes that the Company has breached any of the

8 above provisions, it shall promptly notify the Company providing a written statement

9 of the alleged breach. The parties shall attempt to resolve the dispute for a period

10 not to exceed thirty (30) days after the Commission’s notification of the alleged
11 breach. If the Commission is unable to resolve the dispute to its satisfaction, the
12
Commission may bring an action to enforce this Decree. 13

14

VII. TERMINATION OF DECREE

15

17. This Consent Decree shall be in effect for three (3) years

16 commencing with the date the Consent Decree is entered by the Court. If the
17 Commission petitions the Court and the Court finds the Company to have violated
18 the terms of the Consent Decree, the Court may extend the period of the Consent
19 Decree and award the Commission its costs in bringing an enforcement action.
20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27 28
Consent Decree - Page 7

E Q U A L E M P L O YM E N T O PP O R T UN IT Y C O M M I SS IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building
909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061
Telephone (206) 220-6883 Fax (206) 220-6911 TDD (206) 220-6882

1

DATED this 13th day of September

, 2005.

2 A. LUIS LUCERO, JR. 3 Regional Attorney
4 JOHN F. STANLEY Acting Supervisory Trial Attorney
5
WESLEY KATAHIRA 6 Senior Trial Attorney 7 ISBA # 6188026

JAMES L. LEE Deputy General Counsel
GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel

8 BY: /s/ A. Luis Lucero, Jr.

9 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

10

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Seattle District Office

Office of the General Counsel

11 909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104

1801 "L" Street NW Washington, D.C. 20507

12 Telephone (206) 220-6918

Attorneys for Plaintiff EEOC 13

14 Dated: 15

September 13, 2005

16 BY: 17 18 19

/s/ John J. Greaney John J. Greaney, Esq. Hanis & Greaney, LLP
Attorneys for Defendant

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27 28
Consent Decree - Page 8

E Q U A L E M P L O YM E N T O PP O R T UN IT Y C O M M I SS IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building
909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061
Telephone (206) 220-6883 Fax (206) 220-6911 TDD (206) 220-6882

1

Hon. Ricardo S. Martinez

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

10 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
11

12

Plaintiff,

13

and

14 GLORIA CROUCH,

15

Intervenor,

16 v.
17
RLS, INC., dba SEBO’S DO-IT-CENTER, 18

19

Defendant.

Case No. 04-2066-RSM
ORDER APPROVING CONSENT DECREE
[PROPOSED]

20

The Court having considered the foregoing stipulated agreement of the

21 parties, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the foregoing consent decree be, and the

22 same hereby is, approved as the final decree of this Court in full settlement of this
23 action. This lawsuit is hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs or
24 attorneys' fees to any party. The Court retains jurisdiction of this matter for
25 purposes of enforcing the consent decree approved herein.
26

27 28
Consent Decree - Page 9

E Q U A L E M P L O YM E N T O PP O R T UN IT Y C O M M I SS IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building
909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061
Telephone (206) 220-6883 Fax (206) 220-6911 TDD (206) 220-6882

1

DATED this

day of

, 2005.

2

3 HON. RICARDO S. MARTINEZ

4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

5

6

7

8

9

10 PRESENTED BY: 11

12 ___________________________________ WESLEY KATAHIRA
13 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 14 COMMISSION

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27 28
Consent Decree - Page 10

E Q U A L E M P L O YM E N T O PP O R T UN IT Y C O M M I SS IO N
Seattle District Office Federal Office Building
909 First Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, Washington 98104-1061
Telephone (206) 220-6883 Fax (206) 220-6911 TDD (206) 220-6882

 
 1

Hon. Ricardo S. Martinez

2

3

4

1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111.

5

Illmlll III 1111111 1IIIti 11111 Imll II I1I1

U.j..( :V-02066-AI'I'O

6

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8 FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

Case No. 04-2066-RSM
ORDER APPROVING CONSENT DECREE

18

Defendant.

19

The Court having considered the foregoing stipulated agreement of the parties,

20
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the foregoing consent decree be, and the same
21
hereby is, approved as the final decree of this Court in full settlement of this action.
22

23 This lawsuit is hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs or attorneys' fees to

24 any party. The Court retains jurisdiction of this matter for purposes of enforcing the

25 consent decree
26
27
28 ORDER APPROVING CONSENT DECREE - PAGE 1

1 approved herein.

2

DATED this \'\J!, day of _....:SL.~~~ke..mnJ'w"'"AL-AL-...._. 2005.

3

4

~.2U

5

HON. JAM S L. ROBART

UNITED S TES DISTRICT JUDGE for

6

HON. RIC DO S. MARTINEZ

7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8

9

10

II

12 PRESENTED BY:

13
14 lsi Wesle~ Katahir. WESLEY KATAHIRA
15 SENIOR TRIAL ATIORNEY EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
16 COMMISSION

17

1~

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 ORDER APPROVING CONSENT
DECREE - PAGE 2

 
 WAWD CM/ECF Version 3.0.4 - Docket Report

https://ecf.wawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?223633978109065-L_...

CLOSED
U.S. District Court United States District Court for the Western District of Washington (Seattle)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:04-cv-02066-RSM

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. RLS Inc Assigned to: Hon. Ricardo S Martinez Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

Date Filed: 09/30/2004 Date Terminated: 09/14/2005 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by A Luis Lucero, Jr EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION SEATTLE DISTRICT OFFICE 909 FIRST AVE STE 400 SEATTLE, WA 98104-1061 206-220-6883 Email: LUIS.LUCERO@EEOC.GOV LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

John Freeman Stanley EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION SEATTLE DISTRICT OFFICE 909 FIRST AVE STE 400 SEATTLE, WA 98104-1061 206-220-6883 Fax: 206-220-6892 Email: JOHN.STANLEY@EEOC.GOV LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Wesley Katahira EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION SEATTLE DISTRICT OFFICE 909 FIRST AVE STE 400 SEATTLE, WA 98104-1061 206-220-6883 Fax: 206-220-6851 Email: wesley.katahira@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY

1 of 4

6/6/2007 11:02 AM

WAWD CM/ECF Version 3.0.4 - Docket Report

https://ecf.wawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?223633978109065-L_...

Intervenor Plaintiff Gloria Crouch
V. Defendant RLS Inc doing business as Sebo's Do-It-Center

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Peter Moote P O BOX 625 5492 HARBOR AVE FREELAND, WA 98249 360-331-4961 Fax: FAX 1-360-331-7755 Email: emplatty@whidbey.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jessie L. Valentine ATTORNEY AT LAW PO BOX 488 LANGLEY, WA 98249 360-221-7277 Email: law@whidbey.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by John J Greaney, Jr. HANIS GREANEY 6703 S 234TH ST STE 300 KENT, WA 98032 253-520-5000 Email: jgreaney@hgzlaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/30/2004
10/15/2004 10/22/2004 11/03/2004

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT and JURY TRIAL DEMAND against defendant RLS Inc (Summons(es) issued) (Receipt # fee waived) , filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(PM, ) Additional attachment(s) added on 10/4/2004 (PM, ). Additional attachment(s) added on 10/8/2004 (PM, ). (Entered: 10/04/2004)
2 DECLARATION OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS and Complaint upon defendant RLS Inc on 10/13/2004 (CL, ) (Entered: 10/18/2004)
3 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney John J Greaney, Jr on behalf of Defendant RLS Inc (Greaney, John) (Entered: 10/22/2004)
4 ANSWER to Complaint by RLS Inc.(Greaney, John) (Entered: 11/03/2004)

2 of 4

6/6/2007 11:02 AM

WAWD CM/ECF Version 3.0.4 - Docket Report

https://ecf.wawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?223633978109065-L_...

11/16/2004 12/07/2004 12/07/2004 12/28/2004 01/03/2005 01/03/2005 01/14/2005
01/21/2005
02/08/2005
02/09/2005 02/09/2005 02/18/2005 02/18/2005

5 ORDER REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES, JOINT STATUS REPORT AND EARLY SETTLEMENT Joint Status Report due by 12/29/2004, by Judge Ricardo Martinez. (LC, ) (Entered: 11/16/2004)
6 NOTICE of Appearance by Peter Moote and Jessie Valentine on behalf of intervener Gloria Crouch. (Moote, Peter) Modified text on 12/8/2004 (AF, ). (Entered: 12/07/2004)
7 MOTION to Intervene with supporting memorandum by Intervenor Plaintiff Gloria Crouch. Noting Date 12/24/2004. (Attachments: # 1 Complaint# 2 Proposed Order)(Moote, Peter) (Entered: 12/07/2004)
8 JOINT STATUS REPORT AND DISCOVERY PLAN filed by all parties. Est. Trial Days: eight. (Stanley, John) (Entered: 12/28/2004)
9 ORDER granting 7 MOTION to Intervene with supporting memorandum filed by Gloria Crouch, by Judge Ricardo Martinez. (RS, ) (Entered: 01/03/2005)
10 INTERVENOR COMPLAINT filed by Gloria Crouch.(RS, ) (Entered: 01/03/2005)
11 SCHEDULING ORDER: Jury Trial set for 4/17/2006 09:00 AM before Hon. Ricardo Martinez. Joinder of Parties due by 7/1/2005; Expert Witness Disclosure due by 9/30/2005; Motions due by 10/28/2005; Discovery due by 11/30/2005; Dispositive motions due by 12/28/2005; 39.1 Mediation to be completed by 5/31/2005; Motions in Limine due by 3/20/2006; Pretrial Order due by 4/5/2006; Trial briefs to be submitted by 4/12/2006; Voir dire/jury instructions due by 4/12/2006; Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law to be submitted by 4/12/2006 by Judge Ricardo Martinez. (LW) (Entered: 01/14/2005)
12 AMENDED MOTION to Intervene by Claimant Gloria Crouch, with supporting memorandum by Intervenor Plaintiff Gloria Crouch. Noting Date 2/11/2005. (Attachments: # 1amended complaint # 2proposed order)(Moote, Peter) Text Modified and attachments named on 1/24/2005 (RS, ). (Entered: 01/21/2005)
13 Stipulated MOTION to Intervene by Intervenor Plaintiff Gloria Crouch. Noting Date 2/11/2005. (Attachments: # 1proposed amended complaint # 2proposed order)(Moote, Peter) Modified on 2/9/2005 to name attachments (RS, ). (Entered: 02/08/2005)
14 Supplemental AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendant RLS Inc, filed by Gloria Crouch.(Moote, Peter) (Entered: 02/09/2005)
15 NOTICE by Intervenor Plaintiff Gloria Crouch of Withdrawal of Amended and Stipulated Motions to Intervene Dated 1/21/05 and 2/8/05 (Moote, Peter) (Entered: 02/09/2005)
16 Defendant's ANSWER to Amended Complaint by RLS Inc.(Greaney, John) (Entered: 02/18/2005)
17 ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE of summons and complaint by counsel John Greaney on behalf of Defendant RLS Inc on 02/16/05. (Greaney, John) (Entered: 02/18/2005)

3 of 4

6/6/2007 11:02 AM

WAWD CM/ECF Version 3.0.4 - Docket Report

https://ecf.wawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?223633978109065-L_...

05/23/2005 05/27/2005 09/06/2005 09/13/2005 09/14/2005 11/18/2005 11/21/2005

18 MOTION for Extension of Time To Complete Mediation and proposed order by Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Noting Date 5/23/2005. (Katahira, Wesley)Text Modified on 5/24/2005 (RS, ). (Entered: 05/23/2005)
19 ORDER granting 18 MOTION for Extension of Time To Complete Mediation filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; mediation ddl continued to 8/31/05 by Judge Ricardo Martinez. (RS, ) (Entered: 05/31/2005)
20 NOTICE from Mediator Judge Larry Jordan, that on 8/31/05, the parties participated in a mediation. This matter is now resolved. (CL, ) (Entered: 09/08/2005)
21 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER Consent Decree by parties. (Katahira, Wesley) (Entered: 09/13/2005)
22 ORDER APPROVING CONSENT DECREE by Judge James L. Robart. (RS, ) (Entered: 09/15/2005)
23 Stipulated MOTION and Proposed Order by Defendant RLS Inc. (Greaney, John) Modified text on 11/21/2005 (RS, ). (Entered: 11/18/2005)
24 ORDER granting 23 Stipulated Motion for dismissal with prejudice by Judge Ricardo S Martinez.(RS, ) (Entered: 11/21/2005)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

06/06/2007 09:04:22

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code:

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

Billable Pages: 2

Cost:

eeoc 2:04-cv-02066-RSM 0.16

4 of 4

6/6/2007 11:02 AM

 
 EEOC LITIGATION SETTLEMENT REPORT - September 2005

http://www.eeoc.gov/litigation/settlements/settlement09-05.html

EEOC v. RLS, Inc., dba SEBO's Do-It-Center No. CV4-2066M (W.D. Wash. Sept. 30, 2005)
The Seattle District Office alleged that defendant, a hardware and home improvement company with two stores in the State of Washington, subjected charging party to a sexually hostile work environment that resulted in her constructive discharge. In October 2001, at age 18, charging party began working for defendant as a cashier in its Clinton, Washington store, and also trained in cabinet design under the 40-year-old store manager/co-owner. The store manager initially subjected charging party to sexual jokes and comments, and over a 2-year period the conduct escalated to daily jokes, comments, groping, ogling, vulgarities, and innuendos about having a sexual relationship. He met charging party's resistance (such as vocally objecting or turning or pulling away) with veiled threats to her job security. After a particularly objectionable incident, during which the store manager hugged charging party, kissed her on the lips, and told her he loved her, she told him she was uncomfortable with their working relationship and no longer wanted to work in cabinet design. Although the manager said he would set things up differently, and offered her increased compensation, she resigned in October 2003.
Under the 3-year consent decree resolving this case, defendant will pay charging party $120,000 in monetary relief and provide a positive reference to her prospective employers. Defendant's Clinton store will not retaliate against current or former employees.

1 of 1

6/6/2007 11:17 AM