organization:equal employment opportunity commission

  • Des employés américains de McDonald’s en grève pour dénoncer le harcèlement sexuel AFP - 19 Septembre 2018 - RTBF
    https://www.rtbf.be/info/monde/detail_des-employes-americains-de-mcdonald-s-en-greve-pour-denoncer-le-harcelem

    Des employés de McDonald’s dans dix villes américaines se sont mis en grève mardi pour protester, dans la lignée du mouvement #MeToo, contre le manque d’efforts faits par l’entreprise pour défendre ses employés contre le harcèlement sexuel.

    Ces salariés, qui occupent des emplois très souvent précaires, reprochent au géant de la restauration rapide de ne pas faire assez pour les protéger contre les attouchements ou les commentaires déplacés. 

    « Je suis en grève et je suis ici aujourd’hui pour demander un changement », a expliqué Theresa Cervantes, qui dénonce le harcèlement des managers sur les employés. 

    Cette jeune femme de 20 ans manifestait avec des dizaines d’autres employés, pour la plupart des femmes, devant le siège social de l’entreprise, à Chicago. 

    « Le harcèlement sexuel est un problème universel. C’est une maladie », a-t-elle appuyé.


    Des manifestants sont également descendus dans la rue dans des villes comme Kansas City ou Saint-Louis.

    Ce mouvement social intervient quatre mois après que plusieurs employées ont porté plainte contre l’entreprise devant l’EEOC, l’agence fédérale chargée de promouvoir l’égalité dans le monde du travail.

    « Nous ne pouvons plus accepter qu’un travailleur sur deux subisse de la violence sous la supervision » de McDonald’s, a déclaré Karla Altmayer, organisatrice de la manifestation à Chicago. 

    La chaîne de restauration rapide a affirmé dans un communiqué disposer de « politiques, procédures et formations strictes » pour prévenir le harcèlement sexuel.

    Elle a souligné avoir également embauché des experts en matière de prévention et de réaction « pour faire évoluer nos politiques afin que quiconque travaillant pour McDonald’s le fasse dans un environnement sûr chaque jour ».

     #mcdonald’s #harcèlement #sexisme #femmes #harcèlement_sexuel #culture_du_viol #travail #violence #metoo #violences_sexuelles #discrimination #mcdonald's #multinationale #USA

  • She Left #Harvard. He Got to Stay.

    Did the university’s handling of one professor’s sexual-harassment complaint keep other women from coming forward for decades?

    Karl’s first semester at Harvard went well. Her course evaluations were excellent, she remembers. When Domínguez came by her office one day that summer, he wrapped her in his arms and tried to kiss her. She pulled away, though she didn’t make a scene. She didn’t want to offend him. Domínguez offered a parting suggestion: Don’t spend too much time on students, he said, because teaching is not what Harvard rewards.

    She mentioned the hug and kiss to some friends, but didn’t report him to administrators. She hoped it was an aberration.

    That fall, Harvard hosted a dinner that included, as a guest, the former president of Venezuela, Rafael Caldera. Karl had done research in Venezuela, and had gotten to know Caldera. When she arrived at the dinner, Domínguez greeted her then turned to Caldera and said, “Conoce a Terry. Ella es mi esclava.”

    Translation: “You know Terry. She is my slave.”

    Domínguez asked for a ride home that night, as he often did. She had come to dread those requests, but it was hard to say no. In the car, she confronted him about the comment. He told her he was surprised that she was offended. That’s when he kissed her and slid his hand up her skirt, telling her he would be the next department chairman, decide her promotion, review her book. Karl froze. She had never even heard the term “sexual harassment,” but she knew what was going on. “I’m feeling like somebody is asking for sexual favors in return for a good review,” she says.

    Later, she would scold herself for being naïve, for not recognizing what seemed, in retrospect, like an obvious ploy. She also told herself she could handle it. “You try to minimize it,” she says. “OK, this just happened in the hotel, and I’m going to lunch with him and I’m going to say ‘Don’t ever do this again’ and it’s going to be OK. You tell yourself over and over, ‘It’s going to be OK.’”

    Considering his previous behavior, Karl took the statement as a threat. “At this point, I became physically afraid of him,” she would later write when describing the incident in a complaint filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. She was determined never to be alone with him again.

    At the end of July 1983, Karl and Domínguez signed an agreement, one she hoped would offer some measure of protection. Domínguez promised to “conduct himself in the future at all times in a fashion respectful” of Karl. In August, Rosovsky wrote in a letter to Karl that Domínguez’s “repeated sexual advances and certain other deprecating actions” amounted to a “serious abuse of authority — for which he is fully responsible.” Along with being temporarily removed from administrative responsibilities, he was also forbidden from reviewing Karl’s work or taking part in discussions about her promotion. As for Karl, she was given three semesters of paid leave, and her tenure clock was put on hold for two years. In addition, Rosovsky said that administrators would talk more about sexual-harassment procedures and that the faculty council might address it.

    But the books weren’t closed yet. Karl was hearing rumors that made her worried about her reputation. In October Domínguez met with a number of graduate students, including Philip Oxhorn, now a professor of political science at McGill University. Oxhorn recalls that Domínguez told the students what happened was “a love affair gone bad, and that he was as much a victim as Terry, if not more so.” Another graduate student who was at that meeting, Cynthia Sanborn, now research vice president at the University of the Pacific, in Peru, later described it in a letter to Rosovsky: “[Domínguez] clearly implied that his harassment of the junior professor in this case was actually a ’misunderstanding,’ and if he could only tell us his side of the story we would see things differently,” she wrote.

    Meanwhile Domínguez steadily climbed the ladder at Harvard. In 1995, he was selected as director of the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, a post previously occupied by scholarly heavyweights like Samuel Huntington and Robert Putnam. In 2006, he was made vice provost for international affairs, and, in 2014, he and Harvard’s president, Drew Gilpin Faust, traveled to Mexico City together as part of the university’s international outreach. In 2016, a dissertation prize was set up in Domínguez’s honor at the university’s Latin American-studies center. Originally the prize, and the $54,000 raised to support it, was to be given through the Latin American Studies Association, but when some who knew about Domínguez’s behavior, including Philip Oxhorn, caught wind of the plan, they worked behind the scenes to scuttle it. “This was not a man who deserved that kind of recognition,” Oxhorn says.

    Karl believes Harvard administrators played down her many complaints, attempting to mollify her rather than dealing with a difficult situation head-on. Harvard refused, as some universities still do, to publicly name the person responsible. They also let him stay, and promoted him, which sent a signal that Karl believes discouraged others from coming forward. If they hadn’t done that, "then these women who experienced harassment in the 1990s and 2000s, it wouldn’t have happened, or they would have known that someone would be punished if they were harassed,” she says. “That’s the great enabling. It’s why the silence is so terrible.”

    https://www.chronicle.com/interactives/harvard-harassment
    #université #harcèlement_sexuel #injustice #Teddy_Karl #témoignage

  • Why Aren’t More Employees Suing Uber?
    https://www.wired.com/story/uber-susan-fowler-travis-kalanick-arbitration

    WHEN UBER COFOUNDER Travis Kalanick announced his resignation as CEO on Tuesday, many of those who pushed for his ouster after years of management scandals credited Susan Fowler. In February, the former Uber engineer published a blog post outlining the sexual harassment, retaliation, and gender discrimination she claims to have experienced there. Uber promptly hired former US attorney general Eric Holder to investigate. On June 13, Uber released Holder’s recommendations for fixing the company’s noxious culture, and his suggestions included a diminished role for Kalanick. The embattled CEO took a leave of absence later that day; he resigned one week later amid pressure from investors.

    While it’s easy to trace the tremendous impact Fowler had on the $70 billion transportation juggernaut, Fowler—like other current and former Uber employees—probably won’t see her day in court. Uber’s employment contract required signing a binding arbitration agreement stipulating that cases be settled privately by an arbiter instead of a jury. (The company says employees now have 30 days to opt out but did not say when it started allowing them to do so.) The arbitration agreement, like many others, also curbs class-action lawsuits by requiring employees to arbitrate disputes individually, although they can opt out of this too. (Uber requires drivers and riders to also sign arbitration agreements, but the language varies.)
    One current engineer told WIRED that Uber’s arbitration agreement has kept at least two people from suing the company for sexual harassment and gender discrimination. Although signing the agreement does not preclude employees from filing suit, the engineer believes that Uber recognizes the chilling effect of mandatory arbitration. “When all of this went down, Uber was smart," the engineer says. “They hired Holder, and this made me realize that no other engineer would be seeking legal action against Uber, either. Who would want to go against the ex-attorney general of the US?”
    ...
    Like some other employers, Uber’s arbitration agreement includes a waiver if employees want to file their complaint with an agency like the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Employers don’t worry much about this because government agencies have such a heavy workload, says Ramsey Hanafi, a partner at Quintana Hanaf who is representing a client with a pending lawsuit against WeWork.
    Hanafi notes that California offers some of the nation’s strictest worker protections, but “then we run into the problem of arbitration, which kind of takes that completely out of the equation." Companies “routinely insist on these clauses, but they see it as a scare tactic."
    ...
    One of the most significant business cases that the Supreme Court will hear during its next term, National Labor Relations Board v. Murphy Oil USA, argues that arbitration clauses prevent employees from bringing class actions. On June 16, the Department of Justice suddenly abandoned its support for workers in a case that cites a New York Times investigation into arbitration as a means of privatizing the justice system.
    “Part of the problem nowadays is that you’re waiving your constitutional civil rights,” says Organ, who believes arbitration agreements strongly dissuades employees from suing. “They see the system as rigged in favor of the company, as it is.”

    #USA #Uber #Arbeitsrecht #Schlichtung

  • “All You Americans Are Fired” - BuzzFeed News
    http://www.buzzfeed.com/jessicagarrison/all-you-americans-are-fired

    MOULTRIE, Georgia — “All you black American people, fuck you all…just go to the office and pick up your check,” the supervisor at Hamilton Growers told workers during a mass layoff in June 2009.

    The following season, according to a lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, about 80 workers, many of them black, were simply told: “All you Americans are fired.”

    Year after year, Hamilton Growers, which has supplied squash, cucumbers, and other produce to Wal-Mart and the Green Giant brand, hired scores of Americans, only to cast off many of them within weeks, according to the U.S. government. And time after time, the grower filled the jobs with foreign guest workers instead.

    Although Hamilton Growers eventually agreed to pay half a million dollars to settle the suit, company officials said the allegations are baseless. Mass firings never happened, they said, nor did anyone use racially inflammatory language. But workers tell a different story.

    “We want to go to work and work all day,” said Derrick Green, 32, a father of six who said he was fired by Hamilton Growers in 2012 after only three weeks picking squash. “But they don’t want that.”

    Last year, thousands of American companies won permission to bring a total of more than 150,000 people into the country as legal guest workers for unskilled jobs, under a federal program that grants them temporary work permits known as H-2 visas. Officially, the guest workers were invited here to fill positions no Americans want: The program is not supposed to deprive any American of a job, and before a company wins approval for a single H-2 visa, it must attest that it has already made every effort to hire domestically. Many companies abide by the law and make good-faith efforts to employ Americans.

  • Two companies accused of discrimination in hiring
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/two-companies-accused-of-discriminating-in-hiring/2013/06/11/b4d4f292-c173-11e2-8bd8-2788030e6b44_story.html

    The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on Tuesday accused two major companies of indirectly discriminating against African Americans by using criminal background checks to screen out workers.

    The commission said BMW effectively fired 70 black employees with criminal histories from a facility in South Carolina, even though many had been there for years. One woman with 14 years under her belt was let go after a misdemeanor conviction surfaced that was more than 20 years old and carried a $137 fine, according to the EEOC’s lawsuit.