41 | EEOC-INITIATED LITIGATION: 2026 EDITION ©2026 Seyfarth Shaw LLP EEOC v. Coca-Cola Bottling Company United, Case No. 2:25-cv-02032 (E.D. La) According to the EEOC, the employee, who worked as a delivery driver for CCBCU in Lafayette, Louisiana, was diagnosed with renal disease requiring dialysis. After he asked for a change in his work schedule to accommodate his dialysis, CCBCU determined he could not work a different schedule as an accommodation and told the employee to apply and compete for other jobs in the company aligned with his medical restrictions. The employee identified and applied for a job with a schedule allowing him to continue dialysis while working full time. However, even though he was qualified for the position, CCBCU refused to place him into the position, and then terminated him in August 2022, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. KEY SETTLEMENTS SECURED IN FY 2025 EEOC v. Security Engineers, Inc., Case No. 2:23-cv-01213-AMM (N.D. Ala.) The EEOC filed suit alleging that Security Engineers engaged in sex discrimination throughout Alabama when the company denied security officer jobs and assignments to a class of women, beginning in at least 2017. The EEOC’s court filings referred to discriminatory directives in the Security Engineers human resources database that said: “DO NOT schedule a female for this post” and “Post is MALE ONLY!” The EEOC also alleged that Security Engineers personnel admitted to some women applicants that they would not be selected for security positions or assignments because of sex. The EEOC’s complaint alleged that Security Engineers maintained a pattern or practice of sex discrimination for several years, denying women security officer opportunities despite their experience in security, law enforcement or the military, in violation of Title VII. To resolve the suit, Security will pay $1.6 million that will be distributed by the EEOC to a class of women who were denied security officer employment opportunities. The three-year decree also prohibits Security Engineers from discriminating based on sex, including prohibiting the company from complying with discriminatory client requests. The settlement further requires that Security Engineers delete all directives not to select, assign or hire women because of sex, and it provides for training, monitoring and reporting. According to the consent decree, hiring decisions for security officer jobs at Security Engineers shall not be based on sex, regardless of site or work location. P.F. Chang’s. According to the EEOC’s charge investigation, during the interview process in August 2024 with the P.F. Chang’s location in Birmingham, the applicant requested Sundays off because of his religious beliefs. The EEOC’s investigation concluded he was not hired because of the accommodation request. Following the EEOC’s investigation, the parties engaged in the EEOC’s pre-litigation conciliation process, resulting in a settlement requiring P.F. Chang’s to provide back pay, compensatory and punitive damages, and revise written policies and procedures about religious accommodations. The restaurant also agreed to require training for its Birmingham employees, supervisors, managers, and human resources personnel on equal employment opportunity rights and responsibilities, with an emphasis on religious accommodations. In addition, the employer agreed to post a notice regarding the resolution of this matter and the laws enforced by the EEOC.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4