An African American delivery driver was the victim of racial
name-calling, and was exposed to a noose hanging in the workplace
which the manager refused to remove. The EEOC issued a Letter
of Determination finding probable cause of racial harassment in
violation of Title VII.
After what the Court called "failed conciliation
attempts," the EEOC filed a lawsuit, which the company
sought to have dismissed, arguing that the EEOC had not fulfilled
its statutory duty to conduct conciliation proceedings in good
What does the EEOC's duty to
The EEOC is required under Title VII to "endeavor to
eliminate" any unlawful employment practice as alleged by the
charging party, "by informal methods of conference,
conciliation, and persuasion." See section 5(b). But before it
files a lawsuit, how much must the EEOC do to be said to have
attempted to conciliate? And can an employer get a lawsuit
dismissed if the EEOC did not try to conciliate "in good
In the lawsuit discussed in this blog, the Court held that
although the conciliation requirement is not
"jurisdictional" (that is, it is not a pre-requisite for
the Court to even hear the case), nonetheless the EEOC's
conciliation requirement must still be complied with "in good
faith" or else the case may be subject to dismissal.
But what constitutes good faith?
Is any colorable attempt at conciliation sufficient to be called
"good faith"? The EEOC does not act in good faith
by simply "making a take-it-or-leave-it demand"
settlement offer, but this case was different: it was
"Defendant's refusal to make any counteroffer that
resulted in the EEOC's termination of conciliation attempts as
futile. If Defendant was unsatisfied with the EEOC's offer
based upon the evidence, it could have made a counteroffer for a
token sum. If the EEOC had refused to budge, perhaps the Court
could then determine that there was no good faith conciliation
attempt. But Defendant refused to make any counteroffer at
The Court concluded that "Defendant's continued refusal
to make any counteroffer when repeatedly solicited for one makes it
impossible for the Court to determine that the EEOC was not
prepared to conciliate in good faith."
The Court therefore declined to dismiss the case.
Unless the employer bargains in good faith in the conciliation
process, even by making a "token" offer or counter-offer,
a court is unlikely to dismiss a lawsuit by concluding that the
EEOC breached its duty to conciliate in good
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
Last week, a plaintiff sued the creator and the operator of the Esteem criminal background database—LexisNexis and First Advantage—alleging that they gave prohibited information to potential employers, which ultimately barred him from getting a job. Tsang v. LexisNexis Risk Solutions, Inc., No. CV-14-0493 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2014).
It is rare these days for a California appellate court to weigh in on whether an
employer is vicariously liable for accidents involving an employee that occur
during the employee’s commute to and from work.
Given the myriad government regulations applicable to credit unions and the need for strict financial controls, a credit union might perceive that an employee handbook is low on its list of priorities.
Most plan administrators know that the recipe for a group health plan’s COBRA obligation includes three ingredients – a qualifying event that occurs while the individual is covered by the plan that triggers a loss of such coverage.
We were happy yesterday to refer readers to a great treatise by our friend, Ellen Pinkos Cobb, Esq., entitled "Bullying, Violence, Harassment, Discrimination and Stress" which she updated for 2014. As a number of clamoring readers reminded us, we forgot to tell you where to get it.