Judy Greenwald, Crain News Service
SPRINGFIELD, Mo. (Aug. 28, 2014) — A federal judge has ruled that a trucking company violated federal law by discriminating against female truck driver applicants when it required they be trained only by other women, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).
The trucking firm, Springfield-based New Prime Inc., instituted the policy in 2004 “in good faith,” said the firm’s attorney, in a statement.
The company has more than 4,000 trucks and about 6,700 drivers, both independent contractors and employees, according to court papers.
In his ruling, which was issued last week and announced by the EEOC Aug. 25, Judge Douglas Harpool of U.S. District Court in Springfield said the company had violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with its policy.
“Prime’s argument that the same-sex trainer policy is necessary to protect the safety and privacy of women is without merit,” said judge said in his ruling.
The EEOC said in its statement that New Prime had introduced the policy after it was found in a previous EEOC lawsuit to have violated Title VII based upon the sexual harassment of one of its female driver trainees. In September 2011, the agency filed suit against New Prime again, based on a discrimination charge filed by Deanna Roberts Clouse, it said in its statement.
The EEOC charged New Prime’s policy of assigning female trainees only to female trainers discriminated against Ms. Clouse and all other female applicants for truck driver trainee positions because of their gender.
It said because Prime has very few female trainers, this practice resulted in female trainees waiting sometimes up to 18 months for a female driver to become available, which resulted in most female drivers’ being denied employment. Male applicants were promptly assigned to male trainers, the EEOC said.
The case will now proceed to determine damages and remedies to the class of women who were harmed by the policy, the EEOC said.
“This is a resounding success for the EEOC’s systemic program,” said EEOC General Counsel David Lopez, in a statement.
Policy stemmed from prior incident
New Prime attorney JoAnne Spears Jackson, a shareholder with law firm Polsinelli P.C. in Springfield, said in a statement: “In 2004, Prime implemented a training policy that required that its over-the-road truck driver trainees be trained by someone of the same gender.
“Prime implemented the policy in good faith believing that significant concerns for the safety and privacy of its female driver trainees satisfied a long-recognized exception to the discrimination laws. In its recent ruling, the Court did not agree that this exception applied to this case. Prime respects the ruling of the Court. Significant issues though still remain to be determined in this case.”
Last year, an Iowa federal judge ordered the EEOC to pay $4.7 million in legal fees and costs for “unreasonable or groundless” claims in a putative class action sexual harassment lawsuit it filed against a trucking company.
This report appeared on businessinsurance.com, the website of Business Insurance magazine, a Chicago-based sister publication of Tire Business.
Are you paying attention to the ups-and-downs of the stock market?
|Yes, I invest in the market||
|Yes, but I mostly keep an eye on just my company's stock||
|No, it makes me nauseous||
|I’m glad I don't invest in the market; I would have lost my shirt||
|Total votes: 99|
Titan International and the United Steelworkers union have petitioned the U.S. International Trade Commission and U.S. Department of Commerce seeking relief from OTR tire imports from China, India and Sri Lanka. What’s your opinion?
|I wholeheartedly support their action – something needs to be done.||
|I think it’s a bad idea that could inevitably tie the hands of domestic tire makers.||
|I oppose any duties against tire importers—they only raise costs for distributors and make it harder to obtain inventory.||
|I’m kind of on the fence and not sure what’s right, but need more information before deciding.||
|I don’t really care whether or not relief is granted.||
|Total votes: 78|