. ~-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

)

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

.l:'A1RlCKJ. DUGGAN

v.

) )

CMAGISTRATE JUDGE CARLSON

)

GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION;

)

COMPLAINT

INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED

)

AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE AND

)

AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS )

OF AMERICA ("UAW") LOCAL 909,

)

)

.:;::

Defendants.

)

_.tJ> • ,l!.>;

)

y-S

tJ><.f>

~

0.-1;-1 "'d

This

is

an

action

under

NATURE OF THE ACTION Title I of the Americans With Disabilities

Act

of

moC'
199-:9:'0~(-.f:-i:IoFeitle

_, \D I:$"

oF~bili~ -C' '"
the Civil Rights Act of 1991, to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis
~

and to make whole Gerald P. Quinn, lr.("Quinn").

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleges that General Motors Corporation,

and International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of

America ("UAW") Local 909, the Defendants, refused to reasonably accommodate Quinn, a

qualified individual with a disability, as an assembly worker at its Warren Powertrain Plant because

ofhis disability. In addition, the Plaintiffalleges that General Motors Corporation subjected Quinn

to disparate treatment.

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 Section 107(a) ofthe Americans With

Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Sections 706(1)(1) and (3) ofTit1e VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-
5(1)(1) and (3), and pursuant to Section 102 ofthe Civil Rights Act of1991, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 1981(A).
2. The employment practices hereafter alleged to be unlawful were and are now being committed in the Eastern District ofMichigan, Southern Division.
PARTIES 3. The Plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), is an agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement ofTit1e I ofthe ADA and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 107(a) ofthe ADA, 42 U.S.C § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Sections 706(1)(1) ofTitle VII,
42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(1)(1) and (3).
4. At all relevant times, the Defendant General Motors Corporation ("the Employer"), and the UAW ("Union") have been doing business in the State ofMichigan and the City ofDetroit, and has continuously had and does now have at least fifteen (IS) employees/members.
5. At all relevant times the Defendant Employer and Union have continuously been engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 101(5) ofthe ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(5), and Section 107(7) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12117(7), which incorporates by reference Section 701(g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000c(g) and (h).
6. At all relevant times, the Defendant Employer and Union have been covered entities under Section \01(2) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(2).
2

I
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 7. More than thirty (30) days prior to the institution ofthis lawsuit, Quinn filed a charge with the Commission alleging violations of Title I of the ADA by the Defendant Employer and Union. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 8. Since at least March 1996, the Defendant Employer and Union have engaged in unlawful employment practices in violation of the ADA, Sections 102(a), 102(b)(1), and 102(b)(S)(B),42 U.S.C. §§ 121 12(a), 12112(b)(1), and 121 12(b)(S)(B), at its Warren Powertrain Plant. These practices include, but are not limited to the Defendant Employer's and Union's failure
to reasonably accommodate Quinn as an assembly worker because of his disability. Quinn is a:
qualified individual with a disability who was and is able to perform the essential functions of his position with or without a reasonable accommodation.
9. The Defendant Employer also subjected Quinn to disparate treatment on the basis of his disability.
10. The effect of the above-mentioned, unlawful employment practices has been to deprive Quinn ofequal employment opportunities because of his disability.
11. The above-mentioned, unlawful employment practices were and are intentional.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. GRANT a permanent injunction enjoining the Defendant Employer and Union, their officers, successors, assigns and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from engaging in any unlawful employment practice which discriminates on the basis of disability; B. Order the Defendant Employer and Union to institute and carry out policies, practices,
3

and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for individuals with disabilities, and which eradicate the effects of their past and present unlawful employment practices;
C. Order the Defendant Employer to make whole Quinn by providing him with appropriate lost earnings and benefits, with pre-judgment interest, in amounts to be proven at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices including, but not limited to, permanent assignment ofQuinn to a first shift position with all benefits and pay level equal to that which he would have attained had he been assigned to the first shift in March 1996;
D. Grant the Commission its costs in this action; and E. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper.

DATE i

Respectfully submitted,
C. GREGORY STEWART General Counsel
GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Assistant General Counsel
ADE~1JJJod:
Regional Attorney
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Detroit District Office 477 Michigan Avenue, Room 865 Detroit, Michigan 48226 (3 I 3) 226-4645
4

 
 •

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

)

COMMISSION,

) HON. PATRICK J. DUGGAN

) U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Plaintiff,

)

) CASE NO. 00-74345

v.

)

GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION;

)

)

1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT

INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED

) AND JURY DEMAND

AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE AND

)

AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS )

OF AMERICA ("UAW") LOCAL 909,

)

)

Defendants.

)

)

NATURE OFTHE ACTION

:.if
;c.. , c0;; 8
':-' '-f:-l ; S
::;'~n ......
?: ,..,0 . ,
:c :o;j.Cr~;Ub1

'TI
r -
m

...:n:cnr- \0 ~
This is an action under Title I of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 199J?and §ltle I 0

the Civil Rights Act of 1991, to correct unlawful employment practices on the-basis of disability

and to make whole Gerald P. Quinn, Jr.("Quinn").

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleges that General Motors Corporation,

and International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of

America ("UAW'j Local 909, the Defendants, refused to reasonably accommodate Quinn, a

qualified individual with a disability, as an assembly worker at its Warren Powertrain Plant because

ofhis disability. In addition, the Plaintiffalleges that General Motors Corporation SUbjected Quinn

to disparate treatment.

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 Section 107(a) ofthe Americans With

Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Sections 706(1)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e5(1)(1) and (3), and pursuant to Section 102 ofthe Civil Rights Act of1991, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 1981 (A).
2. The employment practices hereafter alleged to be unlawful were and are now being committed in the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division.
PARTIES 3. The Plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), is an agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement ofTitle I ofthe ADA and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 107(a)
ofthe ADA, 42 U.S.C § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Sections 706(1)(1) ofTitle VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(1)(1) and (3).
4. At all relevant times, the Defendant General Motors Corporation ("the'Employer"), and the UAW ("Union") have been doing business in the State ofMichigan and the CityofDetroit, and has continuously had and does now have at least fifteen (IS) employees/members.
5. At all relevant times the Defendant Employer and Union have continuously been engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 101(5) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(5), and Section 107(7) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12117(7), which incorporates by reference Section 701 (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000c(g) and (h).
6. At all relevant times, the Defendant Employer and Union have been covered entities under Section 101(2) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(2).
2

• STATEMENT OF CLATMS
7. More than thirty (30) days prior to the institution ofthis lawsuit, Quinn filed a charge with the Commission alleging violations of Title I of the ADA by the Defendant Employer and Union. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.
8. Since at least March 1996, the Defendant Employer and Union have engaged in unlawful employment practices in violation of the ADA, Sections 102(a), 102(b)(1), and i02(b){5)(B), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12112(a), 12112{b)(I), and 12112(b)(5)(B), at its Warren Powertrain Plant. These practices include, but are not limited to the Defendant Employer's and Union's failure to reasonably accommodate Quinn as an assembly worker because of his disability. Quinn is a qualified individual with a disability who was and is able to perform the essential functions of his position with or without a reasonable accommodation.
9. The Defendant Employer also subjected Quinn to disparate treatment on the basis of his disability.
10. The effect of the above-mentioned, unlawful employment practices has been to deprive Quinn ofequal employment opportunities because of his disability.
II. The above-mentioned, unlawful employment practices were and are intentional. 12. As the result ofthe unlawful employment practices complained ofabove, Quinn has suffered emotional pain, inconvenience, mental anguish and loss ofenjoyment of life. 13. The unlawful employment practices complained of above were and are done with
malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights ofQuinn.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:
3

A. GRANT a permanent injunction enjoining the Defendant Employer and Union, their officers, successors, assigns and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from engaging in any unlawful employment practice which discriminates on the basis ofdisability;
B. Order the Defendant Employer and Union to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for individuals with disabilities, and which eradicate the effects of their past and present unlawful employment practices;
C. Order the Defendant Employer to make Quinn whole by providing him with appropriate lost earnings and benefits, with pre-judgment interest, in amounts to be proven at trial, and other affirmative reliefnecessary to eradicate the effects ofits unlawful employment practices including, but not limited to, permanent assignment ofQuinn to a first shift pos·ition with all benefits and pay level equal to that which he would have attained had he been assigned to the first shift in March 1996;
D. Order the Defendant Employer to make Quinn whole by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described above in amounts to be proven at trial.
E. Order the Defendant Employer to make Quinn whole by providing compensation for past and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described above.
F. Grant the Commission its costs in this action; and . G. Grant such further reliefas the Court deems necessary and proper.
JURy TRIAL DEMAND
The Commission requests ajury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.
4

•
•
DATE

Respectfully submitted,
C. GREGORY STEWART General Counsel
GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Assistant General Counsel
~ i"
ADELE RAPPOR Regional Attorney
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Dctroit District Office 477 Michigan Avenue, Room 865 Dctroit, Michigan 48226 (313) 226-4645

5

 
 CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:mied - Docket Report

Page 1 of 3

TAC
U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan (Detroit) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:00-cv-74345-PJD

EEOC v. Gen Mtr Corp, et al Assigned to: Judge Patrick J Duggan Demand: $0
Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission TERMINATED: 01/17/2001
V. Defendant General Motors Corporation TERMINATED: 01/17/2001 Defendant International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America TERMINATED: 01/17/2001

Date Filed: 09/29/2000 Date Terminated: 01/17/2001 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff
represented by Tammy C. Klein Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 477 Michigan Avenue Suite 865 Detroit, MI 48226 313-226-6701 Fax: 313-226-5673 Email: Tammy.Klein@eeoc.gov TERMINATED: 01/17/2001 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Connye Y. Harper UAW International Union Legal Department 8000 E. Jefferson Avenue Detroit, MI 48214 313-926-5216 Email: charper@uaw.net TERMINATED: 01/17/2001 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Daniel W. Sherrick UAW International Union Legal Department 8000 E. Jefferson Avenue

https://ecf.mied.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?422761454998272-L_353_0-1

5/7/2007

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:mied - Docket Report

Page 2 of 3

Defendant
United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America Local 909 TERMINATED: 01/17/2001

Detroit, MI 48214 313-926-5216 Fax: 313-926-5216 TERMINATED: 01/17/2001 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Connye Y. Harper (See above for address) TERMINATED: 01/17/2001 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Daniel W. Sherrick (See above for address) TERMINATED: 01/17/2001 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/29/2000 10/05/2000 10/05/2000 10/30/2000 12/06/2000 12/08/2000 12/08/2000 01/12/2001 01/17/2001

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT (PP) (Entered: 10/03/2000)

2 APPEARANCE for plaintiff EEOC of attorney (dh) (Entered: 10/06/2000)

3 FIRST AMENDED complaint by plaintiff EEOC with jury demand (dh) (Entered: 10/06/2000)

4 ANSWER by Intl U Utd Auto, UAW L909 to complaint [1-1] with proof of mailing (ew) (Entered: 10/31/2000)

5 CONSENT DECREE entered by Judge Patrick J. Duggan [EOD Date: 12/7/00] (DT) (Entered: 12/07/2000)

6 PROOF of mailing of plaintiff's notice of appearance (ew) (Entered: 12/13/2000)

7 PROOF of mailing of plaintiff's first set of interrogatories (ew) (Entered: 12/13/2000)

8 NOTICE by the Court setting civil status conference for 2:00 1/30/01 (RH) (Entered: 01/16/2001)

9 CONSENT decree entered by Judge Patrick J. Duggan [EOD Date: 1/19/01] (RH) (Entered: 01/19/2001)

PACER Service Center

https://ecf.mied.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?422761454998272-L_353_0-1

5/7/2007

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:mied - Docket Report

Transaction Receipt

05/07/2007 15:48:30

PACER Login: hs0328

Client Code: EEOC

Description: Docket Report Search Criteria: 2:00-cv-74345-PJD

Billable Pages: 1

Cost:

0.08

Page 3 of 3

https://ecf.mied.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?422761454998272-L_353_0-1

5/7/2007