©2026 Seyfarth Shaw LLP EEOC-INITIATED LITIGATION: 2026 EDITION | 42 KEY CASES FILED IN FY 2025 EEOC v. Gator Strong, LLC and Gator Strong NC, LLC, Case No. 7:25-cv-01267-M (E.D.N.C.) According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, the former chief operating officer (COO) of Gator Strong, LLC subjected the office manager to a campaign of sexual harassment, including repeatedly making sexual comments to her and humiliating her in front of her colleagues because of her sex. The harassment escalated over time, leading to the COO presenting the office manager with an inappropriate written proposition. The COO repeatedly attempted to talk about the proposition; after she refused to discuss it multiple times, the COO fired her. The lawsuit also alleged that Gator Strong NC, LLC has successor liability for the unlawful conduct. EEOC v. Smithfield Fresh Meats Corp., Case No. 7:25-cv-01410-M, (E.D.N.C.) The EEOC filed suit alleging the employee informed Smithfield of her pregnancy shortly after she was hired. After the employee was involved in a workplace accident, she began having pregnancy-related complications that required medical attention. Her physician imposed certain restrictions on her, including a lifting restriction. The employee told Smithfield of the restrictions and requested a reasonable accommodation. Smithfield, which operates the largest pork processing facility in the world, told the employee that Smithfield does not provide accommodations for pregnancy. Smithfield then required the employee to take unpaid leave and, approximately two weeks later, fired her, in violation of the Pregnancy Workers Fairness Act and Title VII. KEY SETTLEMENTS SECURED IN FY 2025 EEOC v. Hooters of America, LLC, Civil Action No.: 1:23-cv-00722 (M.D.N.C.) The EEOC filed suit on behalf of a former employee asserting a Hooters located in Greensboro, North Carolina, laid off approximately 43 employees in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Included in the layoffs were a class of employees who were Black and/or had dark skin tone and worked as “Hooters Girls.” When Hooters began recalling employees to return to work in May of 2020, Hooters recalled primarily white employees and those with lighter skin tones. The lawsuit also alleged that Hooters Girls with dark skin tones experienced racial hostility and observed preferential treatment of white employees while employed at the restaurant, in violation of Title VII. To resolve the matter, Hooters agreed to provide $250,000 in damages to the affected employees and be subject to a three-year decree, which applies to stores covering four locations in North Carolina, which prohibits Hooters from making layoff, or recall and rehire decisions after a layoff, based on race or color in the future. The decree further prohibits Hooters from making these decisions using standards that allow for subjective determinations based on race or color. EEOC Charlotte District Office DISTRICT PROFILE Director: Betsy Rader Regional Attorney: Melinda Dugas Merit Cases Filed in FY 2025: 6 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Failure to Conciliate: 91 Average Days Between Failure to Conciliate & Complaint: 156 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Complaint: 270 VA SC NC Charlotte ©2026 Seyfarth Shaw LLP
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4