Unlawful Sexual And Racial Discrimination Of Sacramento-area Hispanic Workers, Part 13 of 18

(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the proceedings.)

74. Defendant UCC maintained and/or allowed a pattern and practice of unlawful sexual and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation against female workers, including Plaintiff herein.
75. Defendant UCC directly and/or through its agents and employees, supervisors, managers, officers or directors, allowed Plaintiff to be subjected to unlawful sexual and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation in that Plaintiff’s acceptance of sexual and racial discrimination, harassment and retaliation by Defendants, and/or its agents employees, supervisors, managers, officers and/or directors was an express and/or implied condition to the receipt of certain job benefits and was the cause of tangible detriment to Plaintiff.
76. Such discrimination and harassment also created a sexually hostile and/or offensive working environment for Plaintiff.
77. Plaintiff was led to believe by Defendant Paul Smith and David Smith that her employment opportunities at work would be enhanced by acceding to the sexually hostile remarks, innuendos, and offensive comments.
78. Plaintiff was obliged to work in an atmosphere which was hostile to females by virtue of unsolicited and unwelcome sexual remarks and/or innuendos, advances, requests for sexual favors and other verbal and physical conduct of a sexual nature. The sexual harassment was sufficiently serious and pervasive to alter the conditions of Plaintiff’s employment and create a working environment which was intimidating, insulting, and abusive to female employees.

79. Defendant UCC discriminated against Plaintiff, harassed Plaintiff and retaliated against Plaintiff in violation of Government Code Section 12940 et seq. by constructively discharging and/or firing and otherwise discriminating against Plaintiff by engaging in, tolerating and/or failing to prevent the harassment alleged above and by failing to take any action, or make any reasonable and/or adequate investigation of plaintiff’s reports of discrimination, harassment and retaliation, and failed to take any steps reasonably calculated to end the discrimination, harassment and retaliation and/or correct or redress the unlawful employment practices.
80. Defendant UCC also discriminated against Plaintiff because of her vocal opposition to the harassment at their workplace.

81. The effect of Defendant UCC’s unlawful employment practices has been to limit, classify and to discriminate against female employees of defendant in ways which jeopardize and tend to deprive them of employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their sex and/or race, and Plaintiff is a victim of such practices, is and will continue to be unlawfully deprived of income in the form of wages and of prospective retirement benefits, seniority, social security benefits, insurance coverage and non-monetary due solely to her sex and/or race. (See Part 14 of 18.)

For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.

Contact Information