Opinion ID: 799452
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The EEOC's Investigation and Reasonable Cause Determination

Text: In the months that followed, the EEOC sent multiple supplemental requests for information to CRST. Over the course of the investigation, the EEOC learned that, in addition to Starke, Essig, and Thiel, female drivers Rhonda Morgan and Peeples had also filed discrimination charges against CRST for alleged sexual harassment. On July 28, 2006, the EEOC submitted a third supplemental Request for Information to CRST. This third request for information asked that CRST furnish a copy of all other [c]harges of [d]iscrimination that CRST has received in the past five years from any government agency that alleges sexual harassment. Additionally, the EEOC demanded the name, gender, home address, and home telephone number of all employees that were trained by either [Smith] and/or [Goodman], including the dates of the training and documentation of any complaints made against these two trainers by any of these trainees. On March 22, 2007, the EEOC presented CRST with a fourth supplemental request for information seeking detailed contact information for all of its dispatchers who worked during a complaint-relevant time and for female drivers that began working after January 1, 2005. On July 12, 2007, the EEOC presented CRST with its Letter of Determination, which (1) notified CRST that the EEOC had found reasonable cause to believe that CRST subjected Starke and a class of employees to sexual harassment on the basis of gender and (2) offered to conciliate the claim.