Case 2:05-cv-05131-CRW Document 1 Filed 09/28/2005 Page 1 of 9
United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Philadelphia District Office 21 S. 5th Street, Suite 400 Philadelphia, PA 19106 (215) 440-2684 Iris Santiago-Flores, Trial Attorney

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,

CIVIL ACTION NO.

REMO’S MUSHROOM SERVICES, INC., (also d/b/a Remo Toto’s Mushroom Services)
Defendant.

COMPLAINT JURY TRIAL DEMAND

NATURE OF THE ACTION This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices that discriminate on the bases of national origin, Mexican, and retaliation and to provide appropriate relief to Gerardo RodriguezHen’era and a class of former and current Mexican laborers who were adversely affected by such practices. As articulated with greater particularity in paragraphs 7 through 9 below, the Commission alleges that Mr. Gerardo Rodriguez Hen’era and other Mexican employees were regularly subjected to national origin harassment including ethnic insults, derogatory slurs, and other offensive conduct by Defendant’s owner and President, Remo Toto, which created an ethnically hostile and offensive work environment for them based on national origin. The Commission also alleges that because these Mexican laborers filed charges of discrimination and

Case 2:05-cv-05131-CRW Document 1 Filed 09/28/2005 Page 2 of 9
engaged in other protected activity, Defendant retaliated against them by subjecting them to further intimidation, and unwarranted discipline and termination. Further, the Commission alleges that Defendant failed to display the anti-discrimination Notice as required by Title VII. Consequently, Mr. Rodriguez and a class of Mexican employees suffered severe emotional distress and other damages.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to § 706(t) (1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. "§ 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3)" ("Title VII") and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981A. 2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were and are now being committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
PARTIES 3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 706(1)(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000(e)-5(f) (1) and (3). 4. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer, Remo’s Mushroom Services, Inc. ("RMS"), has continuously been and is now doing business in Avondale, Chester County, Pennsylvania and has continuously had at least fifteen (15) employees.
2

Case 2:05-cv-05131-CRW Document 1 Filed 09/28/2005 Page 3 of 9
5. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g) and (h).
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 6. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Germ-do Rodriguez Herrera and a class of RMS Mexican employees, filed charges of employment discrimination with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by Defendant Employer. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 7. Since at least March 2000, Defendant Employer has engaged in unlawful employment practices at its Avondale, Chester County, Pennsylvania facility in violation of Section 703(a) (1) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a) (1), by subjecting Gerardo Rodriguez Herrera and a class of Mexican employees to an abusive and hostile work environment based on their national origin, Mexican. Defendant’s Owner and President, Remo Toto, engaged in a continuing pattern of harassment against Mr. Rodriguez and a class of Mexican employees because of their national origin, Mexican, which was widespread and unwelcome. The offensive conduct includes, but is not limited to, the following: (a) Gerardo Rodriguez Herrera was employed by Defendant Employer as a Contract Spawning Crew Leader since at least January 2000. He was born in Mexico and is Spanish speaking. 0a) The class of Mexican laborers were predominantly employed by Defendant Employer as either Casing or Spawning Crew members, leaders or drivers during the relevant period. They are of Mexican national origin.

Case 2:05-cv-05131-CRW Document 1 Filed 09/28/2005 Page 4 of 9
(c) Since the beginning of their employment with RMS, Defendant’s Owner and President, Remo Toto, regularly and repeatedly subjected Mr. Rodriguez kIerrera and the class of Mexican employees to abusive, hostile and offensive ethnic slurs or insults, based on their national origin, Mexican. The ethnic slurs included, but are not limited to calling them "Mexican mojados (wetbacks/illegal); "stupid Mexican," "lazy Mexican," "f--king Mexican," "worthless Mexican," °°f--king Mexican pig," "useless Mexican," "Mexican son of a b-tch," "Mexican dumb ass," "Mexican pieces of sh-t," and "Mexican pendejo (idiot or retard)."
(d) Remo Toto made these ethnic slurs regularly, usually when he criticized the Mexican laborers about the quality of the work they had just completed or in response to their demands for fair pay, fringe benefits, or reimbursement for the cost of work-related tools. Remo Toto made these comments directly to his Mexican laborers and in the presence of others, including White contractors and vendors.
(e) As further intimidation, Remo Toto regularly yelled at and threatened Mr. Rodriguez I-Ierrera and the class of laborers with unfair and unwarranted discipline and /or immediate termination.
(f) The offensive conduct was pervasive and known to Defendant Employer’s management. However, no corrective action was ever attempted and the conduct did not stop.
(g) Defendant has no discrimination and/or harassment policy or complaint procedure in place to advise its workforce of their right to be flee of employment discrimination or an harassment-free work environment.
(h) As a direct consequence of the ethnically abusive work environment, and because of Defendant Employer’s failure to take any corrective action, Mr. Rodriguez Rivera and the
4

Case 2:05-cv-05131-CRW Document 1 Filed 09/28/2005 Page 5 of 9
class of Mexican laborers have suffered emotional harm and other damages. 8. Since December 2003, Defendant Employer has engaged in unlawful employment
practices at its Avondale, Chester County, Permsylvania facility in violation of Section 704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a), by subjecting a class of Mexican laborers to retaliation, including unfair terms and conditions of employment, discipline, and termination. The unlawful employment practices included:
(a) Disciplining Mexican employees for having engaged in protected activity, such as the filing of a charge of discrimination, or giving witness statements against Defendant Employer which are protected under Title VII.
(b) Terminating Mexican employees for having engaged in protected activity, such as filing a charge of discrimination, or giving witness statements against Defendant Employer which are protected under Title VII.
(c) Intimidating and harassing Mexican employees for having engaged in protected activity, such as the filing charges of discrimination or giving of witness statements against Defendant Employer which are protected under Title VII.
(d) As a direct consequence of the retaliatory treatment, Mr. Rodriguez Herrera and the class of Mexican laborers have suffered emotional harm and other damages.
9. Since at least January 2000, Defendant Employer has failed, in violation of Section 71 l(a) and Co) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-10(a) and (b), to post and keep posted informational notices in conspicuous places which have been prepared or approved by the Commission informing employees of their rights under Title VII and the ADEA, and information pertinent to the charge filing process.

Case 2:05-cv-05131-CRW Document 1 Filed 09/28/2005 Page 6 of 9
10. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraphs 7 through 9 above, and its subparts, have been to deprive Mr. Rodriguez Herrera and a class of Mexican employees of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their national origin (Mexican).
11. The acts complained of in paragraphs 7 through 9 above, and its subparts, were intentional.
12. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 7 through 9 above, and its subparts, were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Mr. Rodriguez Hen’era and a class of Mexican employees.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:
A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Employer, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from engaging in ethnic harassment and retaliatory discipline and termination, and any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of national origin (Mexican) and retaliation.
B. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for minorities, which provide for a harassment-free work environment, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices.
C. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out anti-discrimination and harassment policies and complaint procedures.
6

Case 2:05-cv-05131-CRW Document 1 Filed 09/28/2005 Page 7 of 9
D. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out complaint procedures which encourage employees to come forward with complaints regarding violations of its policies against discrimination and harassment.
E. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out a training program which shall promote supervisor accountability imposing on all managers and supervisory personnel a duty to actively monitor their work areas to ensure compliance with policies on nondiscrimination and anti-harassment; and requiring all managers and supervisors to report any incidents and/or complaints of discrimination, harassment and/or retaliation of which they become aware to the department charged with handling such complaints.
F. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Gerardo Rodriguez Hen’era and the class of Mexican laborers by providing appropriate back pay and front pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative reliefnecessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices.
G. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Gerardo Rodriguez Herrera and the class of Mexican laborers by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, including, but not limited to out-of-pocket losses, in amounts to be determined at trial.
H. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Gerardo Rodriguez Herrera and the class of Mexican laborers by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraphs 7and 8 above, including pain and suffering, humiliation, embarrassment, loss of life’s enjoyment and pleasures, depression, anxiety and inconvenience, in amounts to be determined at trial.

Case 2:05-cv-05131-CRW Document 1 Filed 09/28/2005 Page 8 of 9 I. Order Defendant Employer to pay Gerardo Rodriguez Herrera and the class
of Mexican laborers punitive damages for its ma/icious and reckless conduct described in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, in amounts to be determined at trial.
J. Order Defendant Employer to post and keep posted notices in accordance with the provisions of section 71 l(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-10(a) and assess appropriate civil fines against Defendant pursuant to Section 71 l(b) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-10(b).
K. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest.
L. Award the Commission its costs of this action.
8

Case 2:05-cv-05131-CRW Document 1 Filed 09/28/2005 Page 9 of 9
JURY TRIAL DEMAND
The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.
Respectfully submitted, JAMES L. LEE Deputy General Counsel
GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS
Associate General Counsel
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Regional Attorney
Supervisory Trial A~y
Trial Attorney U.S. EEOC, Philadelphia District Office 21 S. 5t~ Street, Suite 400 Philadelphia, PA 19106 (215) 440-2684(direct) (215) 440-2828(fax) PA BAR ID No.: PA6017I Iris.Santiago-F.lores@eeoc.gov

 </s> Case 2:0S-cv-OS131-ER -e~OP!lea""'1III!"1P.60AflJ;t291-On:-="2P--FF~ Pogo 1 af is

I

I

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v. REMO'S MUSHROOM SERVICES, INC. (also dlbla Remo Toto's Musbroom Services),
Defendant.

)

)

)

)

) CIVIL ACTION NO. OS-5131

)

) Judge Eduardo C. Robreno

)

)

)

)

~

..., I1AR 15 ZOO7

CONSENT DECREE Introductiog
A. This action was instituted by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC" andlor "the Commission; on September 28, 2005 against Defendant Remo Mushroom Services. Inc. (referred to herein as "RMS" andlor "Defendantj to enforce
m provisions ofTitle VlhJftne Civil Rights of 1964. as amended. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e seg. ("Title
VII"'). In its Complaint, the Commission alleged that a group of Mexican employees were subjected to national origin harassment by Defendant RMS. which the EEOC alleged created an ethnically hostile and offensive work environment for them based on national origin. The Commission also alIeged that this group of Mexican laborers was subjected to retaliation with further intimidation, unwarranted discipline and termination. Further. the Commission alleged that Defendant RMS failed to display the anti-discrimination Notice as required by Title VU. Defendant R..\1S denied all of the allegations in the EEOC's complaint.
B. This Consent Decree is entered into by and shall be final and binding between the
EEOC and Remo's Mushroom Services, Inc., its directors, officers, shareholders, employees,

I I
I

Case 2:05-cv-05131-E R Document 20-2 Filed 02/28/2007 Page 2 of 15

representatives, agents, successors, and assigns.

C. The EEOC and RMS agree to the entry of this Consent Decree. which shaH fully

and finally resolve aU claims raised in the EEOC's CompJaint in Civil Action No. 05-cv-5131

(ECR)(E.D.Pa).

D. This Consent Decree shall not constitute either an adjudication of or finding on

the merits of the Complaint and shall not be construed as an admission by Defendant RMS of

any violation of Title VII or any other anti-discrimination statute. law or regulation.

Findings

E. Having carefully examined the tenns and provisions of this Consent Decree, and

based on the pleadings, record and stipulations of the parties~ the Court finds: (l) it has

jurisdiction of the parties and subject matter jurisdiction of this action; and (2) the tenns of this

Decree are fair. reasonable. equitable and just. and adequately protect the rights of the parties.

and the public interest.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT:

Non-Discrimination and Non-Retaliation

1. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter ofthis action,

~

2.

~ ~irf'~d" ·~tJ., Delendant WI'II not

lscnm108tlon andIor harassment 0f any el mp oy' ee 10

violation of Title VII.

3. Defendant will not engage in any employment practice which retaliates in any

manner against any person because of hislher opposition to any practice made an unlawful

employment practice under Title VII or because either person has made a charge, testified,

assisted or participated in any manner in an investigation. proceeding or hearing under Title VII.

4. Defendant shall only divulge to any identifiable employer or potential employer

2

Case 2:05-cv-05131-ER Document 20-2 Filed 02/28/2007 Page 3 of 15
of the identified classmembers the employee's start date, position title, final salary and end date, and indicate that such limited disclosure is part of its business practice.
5. Nothing in this Consent Decree, either by inclusion or exclusion, shall be construed to limit the obligations of Defendant RMS under Title VII or the EEOC's authority to process or litigate any charge of discrimination now pending or filed in the future against Defendant except for facts or claims alleged in the above captioned matter.
MonetarY Relief 6. In full settlement of all the claims raised against Defendant RMS in the EEOC's Complaint. Defendant RMS agrees to pay the sum total of Twenty Five Thousand dollars ($25,000.00) to be subdivided to the identified class members, as designated in Attachment C. Each class member will be required to promptly execute the attached Release (Attachment B, which is also translated to Spanish) which will be forwarded to Defendant RMS in both English and Spanish in order for each to receive the monetary payment. 7. Within forty (40) days after Defendant RMS has received the executed Release from each of the identified dass members. Defendant will make the monetary payment to the identified class members, as designated by the Plaintiff EEOC in Attachment C. RMS will submit proof of payment by mailing a copy of each check issued in this matter to: Iris SantiagoFlores, Senior Trial Attorney, EEOC, 21 S. Fifth Street, Suite 400, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Late payment of the check will be subject to the accrual of interest on the unpaid amount, calculated pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961.
Posting of Notice 8. Within twenty (20) business days after entry of this Decree, Defendant RMS shaH post at its work site(s) on a bulletin board, used by Defendant for communicating with
3

Case 2:05-cv-05131-ER Document 20-2 Filed 02/28/2007 Page 4 of 15
employees, a same-sized copy of the attached Notice (Attachment A) in both English and Spanish. The Notice shall remain posted for two (2) years from the date of entry of this Decree.
Defendant shal1 forward a certification that the Notice has been posted and dates of posting
within 30 days after entry of this Decree to Iris Santiago-Flores, Senior Trial Attorney, EEOC, 21 South Fifth Street Suite 400, Philadelphia, PA 19106-2515. If posted copies become defaced. removed, marred or otherwise illegible, Defendant agree to post a readable copy in the same manner as heretofore specified.
Non-Discrimination and Anti-Harassment Polieies and Complaint Proeedures 9. Defendant agrees to draft a policy against discrimination, harassment and retaliation and complaint procedures, which shall be drafted in plain and simple language in both English and Spanish. Defendant shall ensure that its policy or policies against discrimination, harassment and retaliation and related complaint procedures meet the following minimum criteria:
(a) state that Defendant RMS: (i) prohibits discrimination against employees in violation of Title VII; (ii) prohibits retaliation against employees for opposing employment practices they reasonably believe are discriminatory or for participating in an investigation by the EEOC or a state or local governmental agency of a charge of discrimination under Title VII; (iii) prohibits any act, policy or practice that has the effect of harassing or intimidating any employee on the basis of race and/or national origin and/or retaliation, in violation of Title VII; and (iv) prohibits any act, policy or practice that has the effect of creating, facilitating or pennitting the existence of a work environment that is hostile to employees through acts such as physical/verbal abuse and derogatory comments in violation of Tide VII;
(b) includes a complaint procedure designed to encourage employees to come
4

Case 2:05-cv-05131-ER Document 20-2 Filed 02/28/2007 Page 5 of 15
forward with complaints regarding violations of its policy or policies against discrimination, harassment and retaliation. which shall meet the following minimum criteria: (i) provides effective mechanism(s) for reporting incidents of discrimination, harassment and retaliation; (ii) provides that the complaints of discrimination, harassment andlor retaliation can be made either in writing or verbally; (iii) identifies a neutral supervisor at Defendant' worksite(s) to whom an employee can make a complaint; (iv) encourages prompt reporting by employees; and (v) provides assurances that complainant(s} shall not be subjected to retaliation;
(c) provides for prompt investigation of complaints of harassment andlor retaliation;
(d) provides for prompt commWlication to the complaining party of the results of the investigation and any remedial actions taken or proposed; and
(e) provides for discipline up to and including discharge of an employee or supervisor who violates Defendant' policy or policies against discrimination, harassment and retaliation, and for increasingly severe discipline of repeat offenders.
10. Defendant RMS shall distribute to all of its employees and newly-hired employees its policy or policies against discrimination, harassment and retaliation within 60 days after entry of this Consent Decree.
II. Within sixty (60) days after entry of this Consent Decree, Defendant shall advise Iris Santiago-Flores, Senior Trial Attorney, EEOC's Philadelphia District Office, that its policy or policies against discrimination, harassment and retaliation have been distributed to current employees, including temporary employees, and that new employees, including temporary employees, will receive these policies and an opportunity to acknowledge receipt. Defendant wilt retain copies of any acknowledgment of receipt form for an employee in the employee's
5

Case 2:05-cv-05131-ER Document 20-2 Filed 02/28/2007 Page 6 of 15
personnel file. 12. Defendant RMS shall annually. for calendar year 2007 and 2008. give a copy of
its policy or policies against discrimination, harassment and retaliation to each employee. The policy shall be available both in English and Spanish.
Supervisor A~eountablJjty 13. Defendant RMS shall promote supervisor accountability by the following conduct:
(a) providing annual anti-discrimination training to all of its supervisory and managerial personnel as set forth in Paragraphs 14;
(b) disciplining. up to and including discharge. any supervisor or manager who violates Defendant's policy or policies against discrimination, harassment and retaliation;
(c) imposing on all managers and supervisory personneJ a duty to administer their work areas to ensure compliance with Defendant's policy against discrimination, harassment and retaliation; and
(d) requiring all managers and supervisors to report any incidents andlor complaints of harassment andlor retaliation of which they become aware to the employee or employees designated to handle complaints ofdiscrimination, harassment and retaliation.
Training 14. Defendant shall provide training on the requirements of Title VII as follows:
(a) Defendant agree to provide annual training sessions for any employee or
employees at its worksites responsible for responding to Title VII complaints using a qualified
independent vendor in 2007 and in 2008 subject to the provisions of Paragraph 14(b). The
training will cover employee rights and employer obligations under both Title VII and relevant
6

Case 2:05-cv-05131-ER Document 20-2 Filed 02/28/2007 Page 7 of 15
state or local anti-discrimination lawsJ and wilJ emphasize what constitutes unlawful harassment and discrimination in the workplace, how to keep the company free from such discriminatio~ what constitutes unlawful retaliation, and will summarize how to conduct a prompt and effective investigation into allegations. complaints or charges of discrimination;
(b) Defendant shall first provide training in accordance with Paragraph 14(a) by no later than six months after entry of this Consent Decree and also shall provide such training in calendar year 2008.
15. Defendant RMS shall obtain the EEOC's approval of its proposed trainer prior to the training session.
16. Defendant agrees that. at its expense, it will provide the EEOC with a copy of all pamphlets, brochures. outlines or other written materials provided to attendees of the training sessions.
17. Defendant shaH certify to the EEOC in writing within 15 business days after the training sessions required by Paragraph 14 have occurred that the training has taken place and the personnel who attended. Such certification shall include: (i) the dates. location and duration of the training session~ (ii) a copy of the registry of attendance. including the name and position of each person in attendance; and (iii) a listing of the employee or employees at Defendant's work site(s) responsible for responding to Title VII complaints made as of the date of the training.
Reporting 18. Defendant shall furnish to the EEOC the following written report by Ju)y 2007. The report shall contain:
(a) a certification by Defendant that the Notice required to be posted by
7

Case 2:05-cv-05131-ER Document 20-2 Filed 02/28/2007 Page 8 of 15
Paragraph 8 was posted in accordance with this Consent Decree; (b) a certification by Defendant that it distributed the policy or policies
against discrimination, harassment and retaliation annually to employees~ and that Defendant have disseminated the policy against discrimination, harassment and retaliation to all new employees, including temporary employees, hired within the past six (6) month period preceding the report; and
(c) a certification that Defendant have complied with the 2001 training requirement of this Consent Decree.
Dispute Resolution 19. In the event either party to this Decree believes the other party has failed to comply with any provision(s) of the Decree. the complaining party shall notify the other party of the alleged non-compliance within twenty (20) days of the alleged non-compliance and afford the alleged non-complying party 20 business days to remedy the non-compliance or satisfy the complaining party that the alleged non-complying party has complied. If the alleged non-complying party has not remedied the alleged non-compliance or satisfied the complaining party that it has complied within twenty (20) business days, the complaining party may apply to the Court for appropriate relief.
Miscellaneous Provisions 20. Each party to this Decree shall bear its own expenses, costs and attorneys' fees. 21. The terms of this Decree are and shall be binding upon the present and future representatives, agents, directors, officers, successors and assigns of Defendant in their capacities as representatives, agents, directors and officers of Defendant and not in their individual capacities. This paragraph shall not be construed as placing any limit on remedies available to
8

Case 2:05-cv-05131-ER Document 20-2 Filed 02/28/2007 Page 9 of 15
the Court in the event any individual is found in contempt for a violation of this Decree. 22. This Consent Decree shall fully and finally resolve all claims which were raised
by the EEOC in its Complaint in Civil Action No. 05--cv-5131 (ECR) (E.D.Pa.). 23. This Consent Decree shall be filed in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania and shaH continue in effect for a period of three (3) years from July 1,2006. During this time, this Court shaH retain jurisdiction over this matter and the parties for purposes of enforcing compliance with the Decree, including issuing such orders as may be required to effectuate its purposes. Any application by any party to modifY or vacate this Consent Decree during such period shall be made by motion to the Court on no less than thirty (30) days' written notice to the other party.
24. The Clerk of the District Court is hereby directed to send a file-stamped copy of this Consent Decree to counsel of record.
25. Upon the entry of this Consent Decree by the Co~ this Court shall separately enter an Order of Dismissal, with prejudice.
9

Case 2:05-cv-05131-ER Document 20-2 Filed 02/28/2007 Page 10 of 15

For Plaintiff EEOC:
Ronald S. Cooper General Counsel
JamesL. Lee Deputy General Counsel

For Defendant Remo's Mushroom Services, Ine,

PERKlSS. P.C.

Judi
203 Phi (21 Attorneys for Remots Mushroom
Services. Inc.

Irjs S go-Flores

Senior. rlil Attorn

EQtr.(L EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

COMMISSION

Philadelphia District Office

21 S. 5"" Street, Suite 400

Philadelphia. PA 19106

(215) 440.28

~ /.

By the

Judge Eduardo C. Robreno
United States District Judge

3:/{,1
ENTERED
MAR 1 5 2007
CLERK OF COURl

10

 </s> United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Docket R... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?557258485891417-L_3...
CLOSED, STANDARD
United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:05-cv-05131-ER

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. REMO'S MUSHROOM SERVICES, INC. Assigned to: HONORABLE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

Date Filed: 09/28/2005 Date Terminated: 03/15/2007 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

represented by IRIS SANTIAGO-FLORES EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COM PHILA DISTRICT OFFICE 21 S. 5TH ST., STE 400 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 215-440-2684 Email: iris.santiago-flores@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

JACQUELINE H. MCNAIR EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 21 S. 5TH ST STE 400 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 215-440-2687 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

JUDITH A. O'BOYLE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 21 S. 5TH ST STE 400 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 215-440-2687 Email: judith.oboyle@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

MARISOL RAMOS EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 21 SOUTH 5TH STREET

1 of 5

6/13/2007 2:34 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Docket R... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?557258485891417-L_3...

V.
Defendant
REMO'S MUSHROOM SERVICES, INC. also d/b/a REMO TOTO'S MUSHROOM SERVICES

SUITE 400 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106-2515 215-440-2619 Email: marisol.ramos@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by JUDITH P. RODDEN POZZUOLO & PERKISS, P.C. 2033 WALNUT STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 215-977-8200 Email: judy@pozzuolo.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/28/2005 09/28/2005 09/28/2005 11/23/2005
11/28/2005
11/28/2005 12/23/2005

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT against REMO'S MUSHROOM SERVICES, INC. , filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION.(ti, ) (Entered: 09/28/2005)
One Original Summons Issued as to REMO'S MUSHROOM SERVICES, INC. Forwarded To: Counsel on 9/28/05 (ti, ) (Entered: 09/28/2005)
DEMAND for Trial by Jury by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (ti, ) (Entered: 09/28/2005)
2 ORDER THAT THIS CASE IS REASSIGNED FROM JUDGE CHARLES R. WEINER TO JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO FOR ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. SIGNED BY CLERK OF COURT, MICHAEL E. KUNZ ON 11/23/05. 11/23/05 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(le, ) (Entered: 11/23/2005)
3 SUMMONS Returned Executed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION re: Tom Fredericks served Summons and Complaint upon REMO'S MUSHROOM SERVICES, INC. by Personal Service. REMO'S MUSHROOM SERVICES, INC. served on 11/8/2005, answer due 11/28/2005. (cdd, ) (Entered: 11/28/2005)
4 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand, Certificate of Service by REMO'S MUSHROOM SERVICES, INC.. (Attachments: # 1)(RODDEN, JUDITH) (Entered: 11/28/2005)
5 Answer to Complaint with Affirmative Defenses, Jury Demand and Certificate of Service filed by REMO'S MUSHROOM SERVICES, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(le, ) (Entered: 12/23/2005)

2 of 5

6/13/2007 2:34 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Docket R... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?557258485891417-L_3...

01/09/2006 01/27/2006 02/02/2006
02/02/2006
03/21/2006 10/27/2006 10/30/2006 11/29/2006

6 NOTICE OF CONFERENCE: PRETRIAL CONFERENCE SET FOR TUESDAY, 1/31/2006 AT 12:00 PM IN JUDGE'S CHAMBERS ROOM 11614 BEFORE HONORABLE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO. (copies mailed and transmitted 1/9/2006 by chambers smj) (Entered: 01/09/2006)
7 Discovery Plan by all parties.(SANTIAGO-FLORES, IRIS) (Entered: 01/27/2006)
8 ORDER THAT DEFENDANT SHALL FILE A MOTION TO DISMISS ON THE ISSUE OF THE COURT'S JURISDICTION BY 2/14/2006, IF SUCH A MOTION IS TO BE FILED. ANY RESPONSE THERETO IS DUE BY 3/14/06. A HEARING ON THE MOTION TO DISMISS IS SET FOR 3/28/2006 AT 9:15 AM IN COURTROOM 11A BEFORE HONORABLE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO. IF NO MOTION TO DISMISS IS FILED, THIS HEARING WILL BE CANCELLED. SIGNED BY JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 1/31/06. 2/2/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(le, ) (Entered: 02/02/2006)
9 SCHEDULING ORDER THAT COUNSEL ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SELF-EXECUTING DISCLOSURE BY 2/3/06. ALL PROPOSED CLAIMANTS SHALL BE IDENTIFIED TO DEFENSE COUNSEL BY SUPPLEMENTS TO THE INITIAL DISCLOSURES BY 6/1/2006. AMENDED PLEADINGS, IF ANY DUE BY 6/1/2006. DISCOVERY DUE BY 10/31/2006. MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DUE BY 12/29/2006. PRETRIAL MEMOS AND MOTIONS IN LIMINE DUE BY 1/19/2007. TRIAL POOL SET FOR 1/29/2007. SIGNED BY JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 1/31/06. 2/2/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(le, ) (Entered: 02/02/2006)
10 ORDER THAT THE HEARING SCHEDULED FOR 3/28/06 AT 9:15 AM IS CANCELLED. SIGNED BY JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 3/17/06. 3/21/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED.(le, ) (Entered: 03/21/2006)
11 STIPULATION AND ORDER THAT THE DISCOVERY DEADLINE SHALL BE EXTENDED UNTIL 11/30/2006. AN AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER SHALL BE ISSUED. SIGNED BY JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 10/26/06. 10/30/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED.(le, ) (Entered: 10/30/2006)
12 SECOND SCHEDULING ORDER THAT THE PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER IS AMENDED AND THE DISCOVERY DEADLINE IS 11/30/06. ALL MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DUE ON 12/29/06. PRETRIAL MEMORANDA AND MOTIONS IN LIMINE ARE DUE BY 1/19/2007. THIS CASE IS PLACED IN THE TRIAL POOL ON 1/29/2007. SIGNED BY JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 10/27/06. 10/31/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(le, ) (Entered: 10/31/2006)
13 MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery to Extend Deadline Dates Set Forth in the Court's Second Scheduling Order filed by REMO'S MUSHROOM SERVICES, INC..certificate of service. (Attachments: # 1 certificate of service)(RODDEN, JUDITH) (Entered: 11/29/2006)

3 of 5

6/13/2007 2:34 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Docket R... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?557258485891417-L_3...

12/05/2006 12/05/2006
12/21/2006 12/26/2006 01/16/2007 01/18/2007
02/28/2007 03/02/2007 03/02/2007

14 ORDER THAT THE PARTIES' JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLETE DISCOVERY IS GRANTED. A THIRD AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER WILL ISSUE. SIGNED BY JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 12/1/06.12/5/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(le, ) (Entered: 12/05/2006)
15 THIRD AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER THAT ALL DISCOVERY SHALL BE COMPLETED BY 12/30/2006. MOTIONS IN LIMINE DUE BY 2/19/2007. PLAINTIFF PRETRIAL MEMO DUE BY 2/19/2007. DEFENDANT PRETRIAL MEMO DUE BY 2/19/2007. TRIAL POOL SET FOR 3/1/2007. SIGNED BY JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 12/1/06. 12/5/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(le, ) (Entered: 12/05/2006)
16 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery filed by REMO'S MUSHROOM SERVICES, INC...(RODDEN, JUDITH) (Entered: 12/21/2006)
17 ORDER THAT JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND DEADLINE DATES IS GRANTED. ALL DEADLINES ENLARGED BY 30 DAYS. SIGNED BY JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 12/22/06.12/27/06 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED. (kw, ) (Entered: 12/27/2006)
18 ORDER THAT A TELEPHONE STATUS/SCHEDULING CONFERENCE IS SET FOR 1/18/2007 AT 9:00 AM BEFORE HONORABLE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO. SIGNED BY JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 1/16/07. 1/16/07 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED BY CHAMBERS.(le, ) (Entered: 01/16/2007)
19 ORDER THAT A HEARING ON THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND/OR CONSENT DECREE WILL BE HELD ON 3/30/2007 AT 10:00 AM IN COURTROOM 11A. COUNSEL FOR THE PLAINTIFF SHALL FILE ANY PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND/OR CONSENT DECREE ALONG WITH A SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM WITH THE COURT BY 3/23/2007. IN THE EVENT THAT NO AGREEMENT IS REACHED BY 3/30/2007, A STATUS AND SCHEDULING HEARING WILL TAKE PLACE ON 3/30/2007 AT 10:00 AM IN COURTROOM 11A BEFORE HONORABLE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO. SIGNED BY JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 1/18/07. 1/18/07 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(le, ) (Entered: 01/18/2007)
20 Joint MOTION to Approve Consent Judgment (Consent Decree) filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Consent Decree)(SANTIAGO-FLORES, IRIS) (Entered: 02/28/2007)
21 ORDER THAT A HEARING IS SCHEDULED FOR 3/15/2007 AT 10:00 AM IN COURTROOM 11A BEFORE HONORABLE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO TO CONSIDER THE JOINT MOTION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT DECREE. SIGNED BY JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 3/1/07. 3/2/07 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED BY CHAMBERS.(le, ) (Entered: 03/02/2007)
22 ORDER THAT THE HEARING PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED FOR 3/15/2007 IS RESCHEDULED FOR 3/14/2007 AT 9:30 AM BEFORE HONORABLE

4 of 5

6/13/2007 2:34 PM

United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Docket R... https://ecf.paed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?557258485891417-L_3...

03/14/2007 03/15/2007 03/15/2007

EDUARDO C. ROBRENO. SIGNED BY JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 3/2/07. 3/5/07 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED AND FAXED BY CHAMBERS.(le, ) (Entered: 03/05/2007)
23 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge EDUARDO C. ROBRENO : Motion Hearing held on 3/14/07 re 20 Joint MOTION to Approve Consent Judgment (Consent Decree) filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Court Reporter: Joseph Matkowski.Statements by counsel. Joint Motion for Entry of Consent Decree is granted. The Court approves the Consent Decree and will retain jurisdiction over the matter through 6/30/2009. Order to follow. (le, ) (Entered: 03/14/2007)
24 CONSENT DECREE THAT DEFENDANT WILL NOT ENGAGE IN DISCRIMINATION AND/OR HARASSMEN OF ANY EMPLOYEE IN VIOLATION OF TITLE VII, ETC.. SIGNED BY JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 3/14/07. 3/15/07 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED.(le, ) Additional attachment(s) added on 5/24/2007 (gs, ). (Entered: 03/15/2007)
25 ORDER THAT THE PARTIES' JOINT MOTION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT DECREE IS GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THIS COURT WILL RETAIN JURISDICTION OVER THIS ACTION FOR PURPOSES OF ENFORCING THE CONSENT DECREE UNTIL 6/30/2009. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THIS CASE IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE AND SHALL BE MARKED CLOSED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SIGNED BY JUDGE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 3/14/07.3/15/07 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(le, ) Modified on 3/19/2007 (le, ). (Entered: 03/15/2007)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

06/13/2007 15:36:47

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code:

eeoc++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

2:05-cv-05131-ER

Billable Pages:

3

Cost: 0.24

5 of 5

6/13/2007 2:34 PM


[CONTENT] September 2005 | Philadelphia | EEOC | Title VII | Remo's Mushroom Services, Inc. | the U.S. District Court | the Eastern District | Pennsylvania ||| Mexican | Mexican ||| March 2007 ||| three year | annual | Title VII | EEOC | the claimants $25,000 ||| 2009 [SUMMARY] In September 2005, the Philadelphia office of the EEOC brought this Title VII suit against Remo's Mushroom Services, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The complaint alleged that the defendant created an ethnically hostile work environment for the Mexican workers, retaliating against the Mexican workers with more discipline and intimidation, and did not maintain an anti-discrimination policy.  The case settled by entry of a consent decree in March 2007.  

The three year consent decree required the defendant to refrain from discrimination and retaliation, adopt an anti-discrimination policy, promote supervisor accountability, provide annual Title VII training for employees, give a report to the EEOC on compliance with the decree, and pay the claimants $25,000. The docket sheet doesn't show any further enforcement took place; the case was presumably closed in 2009.

