EEOC Speaks Out on McDonald's Sexual Harassment Case
ALBUQUERQUE (Blue MauMau) - As a follow-up to the Colorado U.S. District Court ruling last week, which awarded four teenage girls over $505K in a sexual harassment lawsuit against a McDonald’s restaurant owner, Loretta Medina, trial attorney for the EEOC in New Mexico, agreed to an interview with Blue MauMau. Ms. Medina said the lesson to be learned from the EEOC lawsuit is that training employees is all important. In addressing her comments on sexual harassment to franchisees, she stated, "You must give as much training as possible to management employees, so that the reporting process is clear. Everyone must know their rights and responsibilities." Ms. Medina had been assigned to prosecute the McDonald's case when it was being resolved.
In shedding light on the case, Ms. Medina said that the employees at the Durango, Colorado, McDonald's did not name the corporate office in their claim with the EEOC, but that they could have. She said, "When we look into a case, we not only want to know who the employers are, but also if there are any third parties involved in the employer's decision making."
But she said they also look at the franchise agreement to see if there is any liability on the franchisor's part. "McDonald's certainly gave the franchisee the policies and procedures to use in operating their business, but the franchise agreement holds the franchisee responsible," she said.
After a sexual harassment claim is filed against a company, the EEOC is charged by law with conducting an investigation. She explained, "We make a finding of whether or not we think there is reasonable cause to believe discrimination occurred. We then make an effort to settle the case, referred to as the conciliation." But if the conciliation fails, she said the EEOC is then permitted by law to file a lawsuit. When asked why the settlement failed in the Durango case, she said she could not discuss the specifics because that procedure, which happens during the administrative process, is confidential.
In the Durango case, she said there were managers who knew the procedures but didn't do the right thing at the right time. "The contention of the owners of the McDonald's restaurant was that they didn't know about it [sexual harassment] because their managers had not been trained to report things." And she said, "In this case there was not any real training of the workers, and only limited training for the managers."
Ms. Medina also offered that she knew there had been some cases where McDonald's Corporation had been named in claims. "Sometimes the restaurants are not franchisee-owned but company-owned, and that makes a difference."
--
Related article:
EEOC Policy on Sexual Harassment:
