PRESS RELEASE
\n5-10-12<\/p>\n
Court of Appeals Upholds Verdict for EEOC against Service Temps \/ Smith<\/strong> Federal Agency Successfully Fights Barriers to Employment of Qualified DALLAS \u2014 In a ruling issued April 26, a three-judge panel of the U.S. The EEOC had charged in its suit (EEOC v. Service Temps, Inc. d\/b\/a The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits disability On Sept. 22, 2010, a Dallas jury of three women and seven men returned After the verdict was rendered, EEOC moved for an injunction against On April 26, 2012, the Fifth Circuit issued a ruling rejecting all of The Fifth Circuit further noted that EEOC had presented evidence at \u201cJacquelyn Moncada demonstrated a great deal courage by coming forward EEOC Regional Attorney Robert Canino added, \u201cThe Fifth Circuit\u2019s The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. PRESS RELEASE 5-10-12 Court of Appeals Upholds Verdict for EEOC against Service Temps \/ Smith Personnel Solutions Federal Agency Successfully Fights Barriers to Employment of Qualified Deaf Applicant DALLAS \u2014 In a ruling issued April 26, a three-judge panel of…<\/p>\n
\n Personnel Solutions<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nDeaf Applicant<\/p>\n
\nCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has affirmed a jury\u2019s verdict
\nin favor of a U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
\ndisability discrimination lawsuit against Service Temps, Inc. doing
\nbusiness as Smith Personnel Solutions, the federal agency announced
\ntoday.<\/p>\n
\nSmith Personnel Solutions, Case No. 3:08-cv-01552, U.S. District Court
\nfor the Northern District of Texas), that Service Temps refused to
\nhire Jacquelyn Moncada for a stock clerk position, despite her
\nqualifications and experience, upon learning that Moncada is deaf.
\nThrough a sign language interpreter, Moncada attempted to explain to
\nthe company that she was fully capable of performing the job and that
\nshe had several years of stock clerk experience. The company refused to
\nconduct an interview or consider Moncada for the position. A Service
\nTemps manager explicitly told Moncada that she would not be hired
\nbecause she could not hear.<\/p>\n
\ndiscrimination and requires employers to make reasonable accommodations
\nto employees\u2019 and applicants\u2019 disabilities as long as this does not
\npose an undue hardship. The EEOC filed suit after first attempting to
\nreach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process.<\/p>\n
\na verdict against the employer, finding that the company had violated
\nthe ADA by refusing to hire Moncada because of her disability. The
\njury awarded Moncada money damages for lost wages and emotional harm
\nand an additional amount in punitive damages.<\/p>\n
\nSmith Personnel to prohibit the company from discriminating on the
\nbasis of disability. On Jan. 11, 2011, the district court entered an
\norder awarding Moncada $103,200, plus interest, in damages for lost
\nwages, emotional harm and punitive damages. The district court also
\ngranted EEOC\u2019s motion for an injunction, ordering that Smith Personnel
\nbe prohibited from discriminating against persons who are disabled,
\nregarded as disabled, or having a record of a disability. Smith
\nPersonnel subsequently appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of
\nAppeals for the Fifth Circuit.<\/p>\n
\nSmith Personnel\u2019s arguments on appeal. The Fifth Circuit Court adopted
\nthe arguments and analysis forwarded by EEOC\u2019s appellate attorney,
\nChristine J. Back. The higher court rejected the company\u2019s arguments
\nand concluded that misapplication of a claimed company policy by one
\nof its employees is not necessarily a bar to finding that an employee
\nacted within the scope of his employment.<\/p>\n
\ntrial demonstrating that Smith Personnel\u2019s manager, who had hiring
\nauthority, was employed in a managerial capacity and acted within the
\nscope of his employment when he did not allow Moncada to apply for a
\njob, even if that act purportedly violated company policy.<\/p>\n
\nto report what happened to her,\u201d said EEOC Senior Trial Attorney Joel
\nClark, one of the EEOC attorneys who tried the case to the jury along
\nwith Supervisory Trial Attorney Suzanne Anderson. \u201cWe hope the jury\u2019s
\nverdict and the Fifth Circuit\u2019s support of it will play a part in
\nbreaking down the barriers that deaf applicants face in applying for
\nemployment.\u201d<\/p>\n
\ndecision acknowledges the diligent work of the jury at this trial.
\nJustice was done. We are very pleased that Ms. Moncada can now close
\nthis chapter in her life and move forward.\u201d<\/p>\n
\nFurther information about the EEOC is available on its web site at
\n http:\/\/www.eeoc.gov<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"