Sacramento Sexual Harassment Lawyer Blog

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

f) Defendant Paul Smith did not utter any similar sexually and/or racially offensive words at the non-Latina workers and did not perform any same or similar acts to the non-Latina workers.
g) During the course of Green's employment at UCC, Defendant Paul Smith persistently demanded a romantic and sexual relationship with Plaintiff Patricia Green. Green repeatedly rejected Paul Smith’s demands.
h) Thereafter, Defendant David Smith spoke with Brown and demanded that Brown provide to David Smith private details and private information concerning the personal and intimate life of Plaintiff Patricia Green.
i) Brown only informed David Smith that Plaintiff Patricia Green was dating Plaintiff White, but otherwise refused to divulge any information concerning Plaintiff Patricia Green.
j) After daily sexual harassment from Defendant Paul Smith, Plaintiff Green refused to continue to work in such an abusive environment and considered herself constructively discharged and quit her employment.
72. All times herein mentioned, Defendants Paul Smith and David Smith daily maintained a pattern and practice of unlawful workplace racial discrimination and harassment against Latino and Latina plant floor workers, including Plaintiff, consisting of racial insults and racially offensive remarks, including:
- Mother fucking Mexican
- Ignorant Mexicans
- Hurry up motherfucker
- Lazy Mexican
- Fucking Mexican
- Wet back
- Fucking wet backs
- Stupid Mexican
- Mexicans are ignorant

Continue reading " Racially Offensive Environment Leads To Lawsuit By West Sacramento Workers, Part 12 of 18 " »

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

STATEMENT OF FACTS RELATING TO GREEN

67. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation contained in paragraphs1 through 28 with full force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
68. Green is a Latina female, born XX/XX/1962, and is of El Salvadoran descent and/or national origin. Green is presently 45 years of age.
69. On or about October 2003, Green was hired by Defendant UCC. Her last position with Defendant UCC was working as a floor manager, earning $9.00 per hour.
70. On or about August 15, 2006, Green was forced to quit her employment with Defendant UCC as a direct result of constructive discharge.
71. While Green was employed at UCC, she was subjected to a daily pattern and practice of sexual and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation as a result of serious and pervasive sexual and racial discrimination and harassment against Latina workers resulting in a sexually and racially hostile work environment, including but not limited to:
a) Defendant Paul Smith vocally announced on many occasions on the work floor to the Latina workers that as the owner he had the right to demand and expect sexual favors from the Latina female workers.
b) Defendant Pal Smith did not make the same statement to the non-Latina female workers.
c) Defendant Paul Smith maintained inside the workplace areas open and notorious sexual relationship with two other women known as Marta and Justine.
d) Defendant Paul Smith made it clear to the Latina work force that things would be better for them at work is they went along with the sexual expectations. For example, Defendant Paul Smith extended more favorable treatment to the women romantically involved with him in the workplace with respect to terms and conditions of employment.

Continue reading " Abusive Local Clothing Company Owners Sued For Harassing Hispanic Employees, Part 11 of 18 " »

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

60. Defendant UCC also discriminated against Plaintiff because of his vocal opposition to the sexual favoritism at his workplace.
61. The effect of Defendant UCC's unlawful employment practices has been to limit, classify and to discriminate against plant floor workers in ways which jeopardize and tend to deprive them of employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their sex and/or race, and Plaintiff is a victim of such practices, is and will continue to be unlawfully deprived of income in the form of wages and of prospective retirement benefits, seniority, social security benefits, insurance coverage and non-monetary due solely to his sex and/or race.
62. Defendant UCC and/or its agents and employees, supervisors, managers, officers and/or directors knew or should have known of the severe and pervasive sexual favoritism on the basis of verbal and/or written reports of such actions made by Plaintiff to Defendant UCC's supervisors, managers, officers and/or directors. Despite Defendant UCC's actual and/or constructive knowledge of such favoritism, Defendant UCC failed to take immediate and/or appropriate corrective action to stop the favoritism. Furthermore, before the resulting unlawful discrimination, harassment and retaliation occurred, Defendant UCC failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent such unlawful actions from occurring.
63. Defendant UCC also subjected plaintiff to discriminatory enforcement of company rules, arbitrary enforcement of rules, arbitrary write-ups, racially hostile comments, innuendos, and offensive and insulting remarks, unfair performance evaluations, contrived terminations, demotions, punishments and retaliation against Plaintiff for engaging in protected activity.

Continue reading " Company Owners Violate Sacramento Hispanic Employees' Rights, Part 10 of 18 " »

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

55. Within one year prior to the filing of the administrative complaint, Plaintiff complained to his superiors, supervisors, managers, and officers about the above described discrimination, harassment and abusive treatment.
56. Defendant UCC maintained and/or allowed a pattern and practice of unlawful sexual and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation against female workers.
57. Such discrimination and harassment also created a hostile and/or offensive working environment for Plaintiff.
58. Plaintiff was obliged to work in an atmosphere which was hostile to females by virtue of severe and pervasive favoritism granted to Latina females plant floor workers who would go along with Defendant Paul Smith, including unsolicited and unwelcome sexual remarks and/or innuendos, advances, requests for sexual favors and other verbal and physical conduct of a sexual nature. The sexual harassment was sufficiently serious and pervasive to alter the conditions of Plaintiffs employment and create a working environment which was intimidating, insulting, and abusive.
59. Defendant UCC discriminated against Plaintiff in violation of Government Code Section 12940 et seq. by constructively discharging and/or firing and otherwise discriminating against Plaintiff by engaging in, tolerating and/or failing to prevent the favoritism alleged above and by failing to take any action, or make any reasonable and/or adequate investigation of plaintiff's reports of favoritism and failed to take any steps reasonably calculated to end the discrimination, harassment and retaliation and/or correct or redress the unlawful employment practices. (See Part 10 of 18.)

Continue reading " West Sacramento Clothing Company Workers Sexually Harassed, Part 9 of 18 " »

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

STATEMENT OF FACTS RELATING TO PLAINTIFF WHITE

49. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation contained in paragraphs1 through 28 with full force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
50. White is a Latino male, born XX/XX/1968, and is of Mexican descent and/or national origin. White is presently 40 years of age.
51. On or about January 2006, White was hired by Defendant UCC. His last position with Defendant UCC was working in packaging, earning $7.50 per hour.
52. On or about June 2006, White’s employment with Defendant UCC was terminated by Defendant Paul Smith on the basis that there was no work. That was and is false and is a pretext for abusive employment practices at UCC.
53. While White was employed at UCC, he endured a daily pattern and practice of sexual and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation resulting from serious and pervasive sexual and racial discrimination and harassment against Latina workers resulting in a sexually and racially hostile work environment, including but not limited to:
a) Defendant Paul Smith vocally announced on many occasions on the work floor to the Latina workers that as the owner he had the right to demand and expect sexual favors from the Latina female workers.
b) Defendant Paul Smith did not make the same statement to the non-Latina female workers.
c) Defendant Paul Smith maintained inside the workplace areas open and notorious sexual relationship with two other women known as Marta and Justine.
d) Defendant Paul Smith made it clear to the Latina work force that things would be better for them at work is they went along with the sexual expectations.
e) Defendant Paul Smith extended more favorable treatment to the women romantically involved with him in the workplace with respect to terms and conditions of employment.

Continue reading " Mexican Workers File Lawsuit Against Sacramento-area Clothing Company, Part 8 of 18 " »

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

41. Defendant UCC also discriminated against Plaintiff because of her vocal opposition to the harassment at their workplace.
42. The effect of Defendant UCC's unlawful employment practices has been to limit, classify and to discriminate against female employees of defendant in ways which jeopardize and tend to deprive them of employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their sex and/or race, and Plaintiff is a victim of such practices, is and will continue to be unlawfully deprived of income in the form of wages and of prospective retirement benefits, seniority, social security benefits, insurance coverage and non-monetary due solely to her sex and/or race.
43. Defendant UCC and/or its agents and employees, supervisors, managers, officers and/or directors knew or should have known of the harassing actions on the basis of verbal and/or written reports of such actions made by Plaintiff to Defendant UCC's supervisors, managers, officers and/or directors. Despite Defendant UCC's actual and/or constructive knowledge of such harassing actions, Defendant UCC failed to take immediate and/or appropriate corrective action to stop the harassment. Further, before the unlawful discrimination, harassment and retaliation occurred, Defendant UCC failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent such unlawful actions from occurring.
44. Defendant UCC also subjected plaintiff to discriminatory enforcement of company rules, arbitrary enforcement of rules, arbitrary write-ups, racially hostile comments, innuendos, and offensive and insulting remarks, unfair performance evaluations, contrived terminations, demotions, punishments and retaliation against Plaintiff for engaging in protected activity.

Continue reading " Latina Workers' Rights Violated By West Sacramento Company, Part 7 of 18 " »

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

33. All times herein mentioned, Defendants Paul Smith and David Smith daily maintained a pattern and practice of unlawful workplace racial discrimination and harassment against Latino and Latina plant floor workers, including Plaintiff, consisting of racial insults and racially offensive remarks, including:
- Mother fucking Mexican
- Ignorant Mexicans
- Hurry up motherfucker
- Lazy Mexican
- Fucking Mexican
- Wet back
- Fucking wet backs
- Stupid Mexican
- Mexicans are ignorant
34. Within one year prior to the filing of the administrative complaint, Plaintiff complained to her superiors, supervisors, managers, and officers about the above described discrimination, harassment and abusive treatment.35. Defendant UCC maintained and/or allowed a pattern and practice of unlawful sexual and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation against female workers, including Plaintiff herein.
36. Defendant UCC directly and/or through its agents and employees, supervisors, managers, officers or directors, allowed Plaintiff to be subjected to unlawful sexual and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation in that Plaintiffs acceptance of sexual and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation by Defendants, and/or its agents employees, supervisors, managers, officers and/or directors was an express and/or implied condition to the receipt of certain job benefits and was the cause of tangible detriment to Plaintiff.
37. Such discrimination and harassment also created a hostile and/or offensive working environment for Plaintiff.

Continue reading " Employees Rights Violated By West Sacramento Company, Part 6 of 18 " »

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

STATEMENT OF FACTS RELATING TO BROWN

29. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 28 with full force and effect as though fully set forth herein.
30. Brown is a Latina female, born XX/XX/1959, and is of Mexican descent and/or national origin. Brown is presently 49 years of age.
31. On or about 2004, Brown was hired by Defendant UCC. Her last position with Defendant UCC was working in packaging, earning $7.50 per hour. On or about July 11, 2006, Brown's employment with Defendant UCC was terminated by Defendant David Smith who stated that there was no work. That was and is false and is a pretext for abusive employment practices at UCC.
32. While Brown was employed at UCC, she was subjected to a daily pattern and practice of sexual and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation as a result of serious and pervasive sexual and racial discrimination and harassment against Latina workers resulting in a sexually and racially hostile work environment, including but not limited to:
a) Defendant Paul Smith vocally announced on many occasions on the work floor to the Latina workers that as the owner he had the right to demand and expect sexual favors from the Latina female workers.
b) Defendant Paul Smith did not make the same statement to the non-Latina female workers.
c) Defendant Paul Smith maintained inside the workplace areas open and notorious sexual relationship with two other women known as Marta and Justine.
d) Defendant Paul Smith made it clear to the Latina work force that things would be better for them at work is they went along with the sexual expectations. For example, Defendant Paul Smith extended more favorable treatment to the women romantically involved with him in the workplace with respect to terms and conditions of employment.

Continue reading " Sacramento-area Company Sued For Sexual Harassment, Part 5 of 18 " »

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

GENERAL STATEMENT OF BACKGROUND FACTS

22. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant UCC is a family owned company, operated by and owned by Paul Smith. Defendant UCC operates as merchant wholesaler with a garment factory manufacturing clothing for men, and manufacturing women's, children's, and infant's clothing. The family also operates two factories in China.
23. At all times herein mentioned, Plaintiffs are informed and believe that: Defendant Paul Smith is of Iranian nationality, and of Muslim culture and heritage; Defendant Paul Smith is the principle owner and operator of Defendant UCC; Defendant Paul Smith is the father of Defendant David Smith.
24. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant David Smith is the son of Defendant Paul Smith and is an agent, supervisor, manager and/or managing agent of Defendant UCC at the subject premises.
25. At all times herein mentioned, Plaintiffs worked on the manufacturing plant floor area of UCC while the plant was then located at 123 East Blvd., Sacramento, CA. Plaintiffs last worked at the subject location during 2006. During 2006, there were about 50 to 60 average number of workers per day on the manufacturing plant floor during peak months and approximately 10 to 20 average number of workers per day on the manufacturing plant floor during the slower months.

Continue reading " Hispanic Workers File Sexual Harassment Claim, Part 4 of 18 " »

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

ADMINISTRATIVE EXHAUSTION/RIGHT TO SUE LETTER (WHITE)
16. On or about April 15, 2007, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (hereinafter “DFEH”) notified Mendoza of Plaintiff's right to initiate legal proceedings on said charge of harassment, discrimination and retaliation on account of Plaintiffs sex, race, national origin and association.17. Plaintiff was employed by Defendant UCC from January 2006 until June 2006 at which time Plaintiffs employment was terminated by Defendant Paul Smith.
18. At all times herein mentioned, the acts and/or words constituting the discrimination, harassment and/or retaliation alleged herein occurred within one year prior to the filing of Plaintiffs administrative accusation and charges with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing.

ADMINISTRATIVE EXHAUSTION/RIGHT TO SUE LETTER (GREEN)
19. On or about April 15, 2007, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (hereinafter “DFEH”) notified Mendoza of Plaintiff's right to initiate legal proceedings on said charge of harassment, discrimination and retaliation on account of Plaintiffs sex, race, national origin and association.
20. Plaintiff was employed by Defendant UCC from October, 2003 until August 15, 2006 at which time Plaintiff was forced to quit and/or constructively discharged.

Continue reading " Sexual Harassment By West Sacramento Employer, Part 3 of 18 " »

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

PARTIES
7. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant UNIVERSAL CLOTHING COMPANY, LLC. (hereinafter “UCC”) and Does 1 to 100, inclusive, was a corporation, sole proprietorship, partnership, limited partnership, and/or limited liability corporation, duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California and doing business in the County of Sacramento, State of California, with its current principal place of business located at 1234 Main Street, West Sacramento, California and is an employer as defined in Government Code § 12926 (c).8. At all times mentioned, Defendant PAUL SMITH (hereinafter “Paul Smith”), is and has been a resident of the County of Sacramento, and was a manager, managing agent, supervisor, employee, officer, director, owner and/or partner of Defendant UCC.
9. At all times mentioned, Defendant DAVID SMITH (hereinafter “David Smith”), is and has been a resident of the county of Sacramento, and was a manager, managing agent, supervisor, employee, officer, director, owner and/or partner of Defendant UCC.
10. At all times mentioned, Plaintiff ROSA BROWN (hereinafter “Brown”), is and has been a resident of the County of Sacramento, State of California.
11. At all times mentioned, Plaintiff MANUEL WHITE (hereinafter “White”), is and has been a resident of the County of Los Angeles, state of California.

Continue reading " Workplace Harassment Suit Filed By Sacramento-area Hispanics, Part 2 of 18 " »

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 12940 ET SEQ.
PLAINTIFFS, ROSA BROWN, MANUEL WHITE and PATRICIA GREEN, jointly and/or severally allege as follows:

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS BY PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANTS FOR VIOLATION OF EMPLOYMENT CIVIL RIGHTS

1. This is an action for damages to redress the deprivation of rights secured to Plaintiffs by the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (hereinafter “FEHA”), Government Code § 12940, et seq.
2. Plaintiffs seek to obtain relief against their former employer, the Defendants named herein and its agents and employees for subjecting Plaintiffs to discrimination, harassment and/or retaliation on account of Plaintiffs' sex, race, national origin and association. Additionally, Plaintiffs seek compensatory and exemplary damages for discrimination, harassment and/or retaliation.
3. This action is brought pursuant to the California FEHA, California Government Code § 12940 et seq. Pursuant to said Act, Plaintiffs filed timely charges of discrimination regarding the acts and practices of Defendants alleged herein.
4. The true names and capacities, whether individual, associate, corporate or otherwise of Defendants Does 1 to 100 inclusive and each of them are unknown to Plaintiffs at this time who, therefore, sues said Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiffs will amend this complaint to state their true names and capacities when same have been ascertained. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege, that each of the defendants designated herein as a Doe is responsible in some manner for the events and occurrences herein described and is liable to Plaintiffs for the damages as herein alleged.

Continue reading " West Sacramento Workers Sue for Sexual Discrimination, Part 1 of 18 " »

Superior Court of California.
Sacramento County

Sabrina Williams, Plaintiff,
v.
HBZT, a California corporation, Dan Black, an individual and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants.

Jury Trial Demanded

Complaint for Damages 1. Employment Discrimination-Gender (Violation of Gov't Code §12940 et seq.) 2. Sexual Harassment (Violation of Gov't Code §12900 et seq.) 3. Injunctive Relief

PREAMBLE

It is sad that in the year 2008, a woman, to be successful at her job and recognized for her abilities and accomplishments, has to fit a sexual stereotype of being rail-thin in order to work.

Ms. Sabrina Williams, is a bartender at a popular East Sacramento nightclub called Nighthawk, owned by HBZT Entertainment well-known in the high-end hospitality industry. HBZT owns numerous venues including hotels, restaurants and clubs in Sacramento, Las Vegas and Palm Beach.

Ms. Williams is a trim, capable, attractive and skilled bartender who served the public at Defendant HBZT's Nighthawk bar until she gained five (5) lbs. Abruptly she was directed to work in the kitchen and to not be visible to the public until she lost 5-6 lbs. “to start.” Ms. Williams is a trim, fit size 5/6 and remained a size 5/6 when she gained the 5 lbs. However, management clearly regarded her as unsightly and not fitting their female sexual stereotypic image. Males are able to continue to bartend despite being overweight or gaining weight.

PRELIMINARY FACTUAL STATEMENT

1. Plaintiff SABRINA WILLIAMS (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff” or “Ms. Williams”) is, and at all relevant times mentioned herein was, a resident of the County of Sacramento, State of California.

Continue reading " Sacramento Waitress Sues Employer For Sexual Harassment, Part 1 of 8 " »

3. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges that Defendant DAN BLACK, (hereinafter “BLACK”) is an individual who at all relevant times herein was a resident of the County of Sacramento. Plaintiff is informed and believes that at all relevant times herein BLACK was Defendant HBZT's Nighthawk's bar manager, a managing agent of Defendant HBZT.

4. The true names and capacities, whether individual, associate or otherwise, of Defendants sued herein as DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, are currently unknown to Plaintiff, who therefore sues said Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that each of the Defendants designated herein as a DOE is legally responsible in some manner for the events and happenings referred to herein, and caused injury and damage proximately thereby to Plaintiff as hereinafter alleged. Plaintiff will seek leave of Court to amend this complaint to show the true names and capacities of the Defendants designated herein as DOES when the same have been ascertained.

5. Whenever in this complaint reference is made to “Defendants, and each of them,” such allegation shall be deemed to mean the acts of Defendants acting individually, jointly, and/or severally.

6. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that at all times mentioned herein, each of the Defendants was the agent, servant and employee, co-venturer and co-conspirator of each of the remaining Defendants, and was at all times herein mentioned, acting within the course, scope, purpose, consent, knowledge, ratification and authorization of such agency, employment, joint venture and conspiracy.

Continue reading " Sacramento Nightclub Sued For Sexual Harassment, Part 2 of 8. " »

8. Plaintiff is an excellent bartender and is personable, slim, trim and an attractive size 5/6. During late summer 2008, Plaintiff gained approximately 5 lbs. but nevertheless remained a size 5/6.

9. On October 7, 2008, Plaintiff was told by Steve Handley, General Manager, that she was too fat and needed to work in the kitchen until she lost weight. She was told she could not work at the bar up front and be visible to the public. Instead she had to go to the back and could only work in the kitchen until she lost weight. Further, she was told by Mr. Handley that when she lost the desired weight he would reward her by making out with her.

10. On October 17, 2008, Ms. Williams was written up for being complacent and was told she needed to be happier.

11. On October 21, 2008, Plaintiff inquired of Steve Handley as to how much weight she needed to lose in order to regain her position in the front bar where she could serve the public directly. She was told by Tamara Hill of Human Resources “5 to 6 lbs. to start with” implying that even if she lost 5 to 6 lbs. that may not be enough of a weight loss to satisfy management. It was clear that the rail-thin image was the female sexual stereotype management required.

12. Ms. Williams has also had to endure a sexually-charged work environment replete with sexual-stereotyping and sexual harassment throughout her employment.

Continue reading " Waitress Claims Harassment By Sacramento Bar Owner, Part 3 of 8. " »