©2026 Seyfarth Shaw LLP EEOC-INITIATED LITIGATION: 2026 EDITION | 40 KEY SETTLEMENTS SECURED IN FY 2025 EEOC v. Waste Industries U.S.A., LLC, et. al., Case No. 1:23-CV-04293 JPB JEM (N.D. Ga.) In its suit, the EEOC claims that since 2016, Waste Industries denied qualified female applicants truck driver positions at multiple company locations throughout Georgia. According to the lawsuit, during the application and interview process, female applicants were subjected to derogatory comments about their feminine appearance based on sex-based stereotypes and were asked sexist questions about their ability to do the job, such as, “Why would you want to do a man’s job?” Despite being fully qualified for the positions, female applicants were denied truck driver positions in favor of less qualified male applicants, the EEOC said, in violation of Title VII. Resolving the suit, the company agreed to provide $3.1 million to be distributed to a class of women who applied for and were unlawfully denied truck driver positions based on their sex. Additionally, Waste Industries agreed to develop hiring, recruitment and outreach plans to increase the pool of qualified female driver applicants; train employees on Title VII’s prohibition against gender discrimination in hiring; maintain certain anti-discrimination policies; post an employee notice; and allow the EEOC to monitor complaints of sex discrimination. EEOC v. Sureste Property Group, et. al., Case No. 1:24-CV-01769 (N.D. Ga.) According to the EEOC’s suit, Sureste violated federal law when it fired its first and only Black project development manager because of his race. The project development manager performed well, despite being assigned more work than his white counterparts, but the company terminated him less than a year after his hire, claiming first that he was “lazy” and not a good fit for the company’s “culture.” Later, the company claimed that his role had been eliminated, but less than a month after firing him, Sureste promoted a significantly less-qualified white employee to the same position. To resolve the suit, Sureste will pay $75,000 and will distribute anti-harassment and anti-retaliation policies, post a notice in the workplace informing employees of the settlement, and provide specialized training to all supervisors, managers, and employees. Sureste will also provide the EEOC with periodic reports regarding complaints of race discrimination during the decree’s three-year term. KEY CASES FILED IN FY 2025 EEOC v. Smoke BBQ LLC d/b/a Cosmos, Civil Case No. 1:25-cv-00278-TBM-RPM (S.D. Miss.) The EEOC brought suit on behalf of an employee alleging that in November of 2023, the server told her colleagues about her pregnancy shortly after she started working at the restaurant. The next day, after Cosmos managers heard about her pregnancy, she was fired, in violation of Title VII. EEOC Birmingham District Office DISTRICT PROFILE Director: Bradley A. Anderson Regional Attorney: Marsha Rucker Merit Cases Filed in FY 2025: 7 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Failure to Conciliate: 78 Average Days Between Failure to Conciliate & Complaint: 112 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Complaint: 188 MS AL FL Birmingham ©2026 Seyfarth Shaw LLP
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4