47 | EEOC-INITIATED LITIGATION: 2026 EDITION ©2026 Seyfarth Shaw LLP KEY SETTLEMENTS SECURED IN FY 2025 EEOC v. X-Treme Tech Servs., LLC, Case No. 24-1829 (E.D. La.) After filing suit on behalf of an administrative assistant based on the employee’s supervisors alleged repeated and persistent unwelcome sexual advances which culminated in her termination for rebuking the advances, the employer agreed to pay $52,500 and provide other equitable relief. Under the parties’ five-year consent decree, the employee must review and revise its harassment policies, train its employees and managers on sexual harassment, Title VII, and employee complaints, as well as submit policy modifications to the EEOC. EEOC v. HSS Security, LLC, Case No. 4:24-cv-03663 (S.D. Tex.) The EEOC filed suit, alleging that despite initially offering a female applicant a security supervisor role, the employer rescinded the offer and refused to hire her based on her sex. According to the EEOC, the female applicant’s offer was rescinded after a lunch with two male security managers where she assured them of her skills, abilities, and experience. Yet, the position was rescinded and offered to two male applicants, neither of which possessed qualifications or experience equal or superior to the female applicant’s. To resolve the matter, the employer agreed to pay $35,000, train its hiring managers, recruiters, and human resources personnel annually, revise its policies, and report to the EEOC all complaints of discrimination in hiring the company receives over a three year period. KEY CASES FILED IN FY 2025 EEOC v. Bossman Tacos, LLC, Case No. 2:25‑cv‑00316 (N.D. Ind.) The EEOC filed suit against the employer, alleging a long‑standing pattern of sexual harassment by male kitchen staff against female servers. According to the complaint, since at least November 2021, male cooks, including the head chef, engaged in egregious misconduct including trapping women in restrooms and walk‑in refrigerators to make unwanted sexual advances, groping female employees’ hips, backs, and buttocks, exposing themselves, and making lewd sexual jokes and propositions. Several victims reported their experiences to management, complaints the EEOC alleges were dismissed based on one owner’s purported comment that the behavior was typical male conduct, ultimately resulting in some employees feeling compelled to resign their employment. EEOC v. Tower Auto. Operations I LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-12926 (E.D. Mich.) According to the lawsuit, an employee, who had over 30 years’ experience in automotive manufacturing, joined the manufacturer’s apprenticeship program in 2018 as the only female apprentice. She performed successfully, despite enduring sex and disability discrimination and the company’s purported perception of her as a liability, EEOC Indianapolis District Office DISTRICT PROFILE Director: Richard Burgamy (Acting) Regional Attorney: Kenneth Bird Merit Cases Filed in FY 2025: 8 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Failure to Conciliate: 98 Average Days Between Failure to Conciliate & Complaint: 172 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Complaint: 271 MI OH IN KY MI Indianapolis ©2026 Seyfarth Shaw LLP
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4