Monthly Archives: September 2018

Five Steps for Responding Well to Harassment Claims

Two nooses hanging near a loading dock and racist graffiti on a company truck designed to be seen by the company’s African-American employees will almost certainly lead to an expensive racial harassment lawsuit against a business, but the federal Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently sided with an employer who promptly took five comprehensive steps in response to this reprehensible conduct.

In its June 2018 opinion, the Court held that YRC, the employer, responded appropriately to these incidents at its Irving, Texas facility. The opinion gives all employers helpful guidance on how to combat harassment in the workplace. Tolliver v. YRC, Inc. (5th Cir. 2018).

It is important to note that the Court acknowledged that the racist actions were “morally unacceptable” and “reprehensible. But the plaintiffs didn’t allege that the acts were directed specifically toward them and “for the most part, learned about the acts secondhand”. So, the Fifth Circuit did not find that this conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive enough to change the terms or conditions of employment as to these particular employees, meaning that their personal racial harassment claims weren’t strong to begin with.

But what really mattered to the Court is that the employer took prompt remedial action to protect all employees after these horrifying incidents occurred. The steps YRC followed offer guidance for all employers facing any kind of harassment situation, whether involving racial harassment, sexual harassment, ethnic harassment, etc.

Let’s call these the Five Steps to Responding Well to a Harassment Claim: Continue reading Five Steps for Responding Well to Harassment Claims

Employers Targeted in ICE Raids and Audits

If you think that only illegal aliens need to be concerned about Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”), then as an employer, you have not been paying attention in 2018, when ICE has clearly put businesses in the crosshairs with compliance audits and enforcement raids.

Take, for example, a raid conducted by ICE in small town Tennessee in April 2018. The Southeastern Provision meatpacking plant reportedly employed at least 104 undocumented immigrants at the time of the surprise raid. The company hired most of these without requiring the employees to complete the required I-9 forms and without making them provide documents showing their identities and authorization to work legally in the United States. To make matters more felonious, these workers were paid in cash each week and not reported on the company’s payroll tax reports.

Last month, the owner of that Southeastern Provision meatpacking plant agreed to a plea bargain in federal court on charges of tax evasion, wire fraud and employing undocumented immigrants. The owner has not been sentenced to prison yet, but he has already agreed to pay at least $1,296,183 to the IRS in restitution.

Similar worksite raids have escalated dramatically under the Trump administration and are happening all over the country. On August 28, a trailer manufacturer located near Paris, Texas, faced one of the largest immigration raids in recent history, when 159 of its approximately 500 employees were arrested by ICE. Because that Texas company, Load Trail, was fined $445,000 four years ago for hiring dozens of undocumented workers, one could reasonably expect the employer to also face jail time and restitution requirements for a pattern and practice of breaking the immigration laws.

How do companies get selected for raids? Continue reading Employers Targeted in ICE Raids and Audits