Case 3:05-cv-O1847-WJN Document 1-1 Filed 09/13/2005 Page 1 of 11

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

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY )

COMMISSION,

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

) _COMPLAINT

) JURYTRIAL DEMAND

SAW CREEK ESTATES

)

COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC.

)

)

)

Defendant.

)

)

NATURE OF THE ACTION

This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of t964 and

Title l of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on

the basis of race and sex, and to provide appropriate relief to Brenda Godfrey who

was adversely affected by such practices. Specifically, and as alleged with greater

particularity in paragraphs 7 ~d 8 below, Defendant Employer Saw Creek Estates

Community Association, Inc. discriminated against Ms. Godfrey based on her race

Case 3:05-cv-01847-WJN Document 1-1 Filed 09/13/2005 Page 2 of 11
(black) in violation of Title VII, when it failed to take appropriate remedial action to eliminate race-based animosity and degradation from white association members/customers, Further, Defendant Employer subjected Ms. Godfrey to a sexually hostile w~rk environment by permitting and condoning the sexually offensive comments of a white mate Board member, in violation of Title VII. A_lthough Ms, Godfrey repeatedly complained about both racial and sexual harassment, Defendant failed to take prompt effective remedial action. As a result of the hostility, Ms. Godfrey was compelled to take an extended leave of absence, and suffered back pay, emotional distress, and other damages in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.
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 pursumat to Section 706(t)(1) and (3) of Tire VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5 (f)(1) and (3), and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C, § 1981A. 2. The errrployrnent practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the jurisdiction of the U~ted States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.
2

Case 3:05-cv-01847-WJN Document 1-1 Filed 09/13/2005 Page 3 of 11
PARTIES 3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), is an agen~ 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. § 2000e-5(f)(l) and (3). 4. At aI1 relevant times, Defendant Employer Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc. has continuously been an incorporated association doing business in the State of Pennsylvania, in Pike County, and has continuously had at least fifteen employees, 5. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer Saw Creek Estates Cowa’ntmity Association, Inc, has continuously engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 701(b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-(b), (g) and
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 6. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Brenda Godfrey filed an individual charge of discrimination with the Commission alIeging v/olations of Title VII by Defendant Employer Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc. All conditions precedent to the institution of this

Case 3:05-cv-01847-WJN Document 1-1 Filed 09/13/2005 Page 4 of 11
lawsuit b_ave been fulfilled. 7. Since at least April, 2001, Defendant Saw Creek Estates
Community Association, Inc. engaged in unlawful employment practices at its facility in Bushkill, Permsylvania, in violation of Sectior~ 703(a)(1) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1), by subjecting Brenda Godfrey to repeated incidents of unlawful racial harassment and failing to take effective corrective action, as set forth below:
(1) Brenda Godfrey, an African American female, began her employment with Defendant Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "SCECA") on July 9, 2000 as an Administrative Secretary/Accotmt3 Payable Clerk. She was one of five clerical ernpIoyees who worked in the business office of the association, and the sole minority employed by Defendant Employer. She reported to the general manager, Nicholas Mazzarella.
(2) In her position, Ms. Godfrey had considerable contact with property owners ir~ the community, predominantly White, who are members of the association.
(3) Stm~ing in April, 2001, Brenda Godfrey began to be disparately treated ~d harassed, based on her race, by white association members/customers of Defendant SCECA. The racially disparate treatment and harassment included,
4

Case 3:05-cv-01847-WJN Document 1-1 Filed 09/13/2005 Page 5 of 11
but was not limited to, the following: a. Ms. Godfrey was regularly subjected to hostility, disrespect, ill-
treatment, and racially derogatory comments, despite her recognized satisfactory work performance, from Defendant Employer’s customers due solely to the fact that she is black. White members/customers regularly treated Ms. Godfrey in a hostile derogatory manner, and referred to her as "you people," "the colored girl," the "the Black girl" or ’kaigger."
b. White members/customers regularly refused to accept Ms. Godfrey’s services or assistance, which was part of her job responsibility within the business office, because of her race.
c. tn addition, because of her race, a false rumor was spread by the white property homeowners suggesting that Ms. Godfrey was having an illicit affair with her immediate supervisor, Nicholas Mazzarella, who is white.
d. The false rumor was then perpetuated by a White member of the Board of Directors, heightening the hostility from property owners to which Ms. Godfrey was subjected. As a Board Member for Defendant Employer, his wrongful conduct imputes Defendant as an "~ter ego."
e. Member/Customer hostility and abuse was openly directed at Ms. Godfrey because she is black, without any further .justification. No other

Case 3:05-cv-01847-WJN Document 1-1 Filed 09/13/2005 Page 6 of 11
office employee, all of whom are White, was subjected to similar ill-treatment. f. Defendant Employer SCECA observed and was regularly
informed of the unjustified hostility and tolerated the abuse, failing to take any corrective action and aJlowing it to continue by, for example, personally serv/cing the customer without any adverse action.
g. Pursuant to Defendant Employer’s internal procedures, Ms. Godfrey immediately brought this matter to the attention of the General Manager, Nichotas Mazzarella. However, in response, Defendant Employer failed to take any prompt effective corrective action. Further, Defendant Employer’s ineffective response was racially motivated. Because the adverse treatment was never addressed, the hostility continued and caused Ms. Godfrey emotional distress and adversely affected her ability to do her work.
8. Further, beginning in June, 2002, Defendant Employer SCECA engaged in unlawful employment practices at its facility in Bush_kill, Pennsylvania, in violation of Section 703(a)(1) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(l), by subjecting Brenda Godfrey to repeated incidents of unlawful sexual harassment and failing to take effective corrective action, as set forth below:
a. Starting in June 2002, a number of homeowners spread a false rumor suggesting that Ms. Godfrey was having an illicit sexual affair with her

Case 3:05-cv-01847-WJN Document 1-1 Filed 09/13/2005 Page 7 of 11
immediate supervisor and General Manager for the Association, Nicholas Mazzarella.
b. Beginning July, 2002 and thereafter, these false rtmaors were perpetuated by Defendant Employer’s Board Member, Richard Krautheimer. Initially he stated to Ms, Godfrey "The word is out that you are doing your boss; hey, what about me?" Thereafter, Mr. K_rauthiemer increased his number of weekly visits to the business office and almost every time he encountered Ms. Godfrey he would say something to the effect of "You’re doing the boss, so why don’t you do me" or "you’re doir~g Nick, how about me.
c. Pursuant to Defendant’s Employer’s policy, Ms. Godfrey immediately and repeatedly brought these mmoa’s to the attention of the General Manager, Nicholas Mazzarella, Further, at the request of the General Manager, Ms, Godfrey reduced her complaints to writing.
d. These false rumors and its progeny created a hostile work environment for Ms. Godfrey and caused her great embarrassment, anguish, humiliation, and loss of reputation at work and in her community.
e. However, despite notice, Defendant Employer failed to take prompt remedial actions to cause the false rumors and inappropriate sexual comments by the Board Member to stop.

Case 3:05-cv-01847-WJN Document 1-1 Filed 09/13/2005 Page 8 of 11
9. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above has been to deprive Brenda Godfrey of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect her status as an employee on the basis of her race (Black) and sex (female).
10. The unlawful employment practices complained of above were intentional.
1 I. The unlawful employment practices complained of above were done with malice and/or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Ms. Godfrey.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WItEREFORE, 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 racial or sexual harassment, and any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of race and sex.
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.

Case 3:05-cv-01847-WJN Document 1-1 Filed 09/13/2005 Page 9 of 11
C. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out antidiscrimination and sexual harassment policies and complaint procedures.
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 non-discrimination and anti-harassment; and requiring all managers and supervisors to report any incidents and/or complaints of discnmir~ation, harassment and/or retaliation of which they become aware to the department charged with handling such complaints.
F. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Brenda Godfrey by providing appropriate back pay and front pay w~th prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices.
G. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Brenda Godfrey by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, including,

Case 3:05-cv-01847-WJN Document 1-1 Filed 09/13/2005 Page 10 of 11
but not limited to out-of-pocket losses, in amounts to be determined at trial. H. Order Defendant Employer to make Whole Brenda Godfrey 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.
I. Order Defendant Employer to pay Brenda Godfrey punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct described in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, in amounts to be determined at trial.
J. Grar~t such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in ~e public interest.
K. Award the Commission its costs of this action. 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
10

Case 3:05-cv-01847-WJN Document 1-1 Filed 09/13/2005 Page 11 of 11
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission J~l~l~ne l~i. l~lcNair Regional Attorney ~udith A. O’Boyle
I_AGO LORES Seine Trial Atf ~rney 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.: PA60171 lris¯Santiago-Flores@,eeoc.gov
11

 </s> IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA FILED

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY )

SCRANTON

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

pE.R

v.

)

)

SAW CREEK ESTATES COMMUNITY

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

ASSOCIATION. INC.,

) 05-cv-1847

)

Defendant.

)

)

CONSENT DECREE

Introduction

A.

This action was instituted by the u.s. Equal Etnployment Opportunity

Commission ("EEOC" and/or "the Commission") on September 13, 2005 against Defendant Saw

Creek Estates Conununity Association, Inc.("SCECA" and/or "Defendant") to enforce

provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e sot ~ ("Title
VIr'). In its Complaint, EEOC alleges that Defendant SCECA discriminated against Charging

Party Brenda Godfrey based on her race (black) and sex (female) in violation of Title VII. EEOC alleged that SCECA failed to take appropriate remedial action to eliminate race-based animosity and degradation from white association members/customers against Ms. Godfrey.

Further, EEOC alleged that a Defendant Board member subjected Ms_ Godfrey to a sexually hostile work environment. As a result of the discriminatory atmosphere, EEOC alleged that Ms. Godfrey suffered emotional harm and other damages. SCECA denies all the allegations in the

l

Complaint andlor any liability

B.

This Consent Decree is entered into by and shall be final and binding between the

EEOC and SCECA, its directors, officers, agents, successors and assigns.

C.

The EEOC and SCECA agree to the entry of this Consent Decree, which shall

fully and finally resolve all claims raised in the EEOC's Complaint in Civil Action No. 05-cv-

1847 (M.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 SCECA of any

violation ofTitle VII.

Findings

E.

Having carefully exantined the terms 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.

Defendant will not allow discrimination andlor harassment of any employee on

the basis of sex or race in violation of Title VII.

3.

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

manner against any person because of his/her opposition to any practice made an unlawful

2

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 WIder Title VII.

4.

Defendant shall only divulge to any identifiable employer or potential employer

of Brenda Godfrey's start date, position title, final salary and end date, and indicate that such

limited disclosure is part of its business practice except the employer will provide a letter to Ms.

Godfrey as set forth in the release.

S.

Nothing in this Consent Decree, either by inclusion or exclusion, shall be

construed to limit the obligations of Defendant SCECA 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 the claim raised against Defendant in the EEOC's Complaint,

SCECA agrees to pay the sum total of thirty thousand dollars ($30,000.00) to Ms. Brenda

Godfrey. In order to receive this monetary relief, Ms. Godfrey must execute a release as

negotiated separately.

7.

Within fourteen (14) days after SCECA has received the executed release,

Defendant will issue the lIlonetary payment to Brenda Godfrey. SCECA will SUblIlit proof of

payment by mailing a copy of the check issued in this matter to: Iris Santiago-Flores, Senior

Trial Attorney, EEOC, 21 S. Fifth Street, Suite 400, Philadelphia, P A 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

3

8. Within twenty (20) business days after entry of this Decree, Defendant SCECA shall

post at its work site(s) on a bulletin board, used by Defendant for communicating with

employees, a sarn.e-sized copy of the Notice attached as Exhibit A to this Decree. The Notice

shall remain posted for two (2) years from the date of entry of this Decree. Defendant shall

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 19]06-2515. Ifposted copies become defaced, removed, marred or

otherwise ilJegible, Defendant agrees to post a readable copy in the sarn.e manner as heretofore

specified.

Non-Discrimination and Anti-Harassment Policies and Complaint Procedures

9.

Defendant agrees to draft a policy against discriIllination, harassment and

retaliation and cOIllplaint procedures, which shall be drafted in plain and simple language.

Defendant shall ensure that its policy or policies against discrimination. harassIllent and

retaliation and related coIllplaint procedures meet the following minimum criteria:

(a) state that Defendant: (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 governrnental 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 andlor sex, in violation of Title VII; and (iv) prohibits any act, policy or practice

that has the effect of creating, facilitating or permitting the existence of a work environment that

is hostile to employees through acts such as physical/verbal abuse and d.eTogatory comments in

4

violation ofTitle VII; (b) include a complaint procedure designed to encourage employees to corne forward
with complaints regarding violations of its policy or policies against discrimination, harassment and retaliation, which shall meet the following minimum criteria: (i) provide effective mechanism(s) for reporting incidents of discrimination, harassment and retaliation; (ii) provide that the complaints of discrimination, harassment and/or retaliation can be made either in writing or verbally; (iii) identifY an employee or employees at Defendant's worksite(s) to whom an employee can make a complaint; (iv) encourage prompt reporting by employees; and (v) provide assurances that complainants shall not be subjected to retaliation;
(c) provide for prompt investigation of complaints ofharassment and/or retaliation; (d) provide for prompt communication to the complaining party of the results of the investigation and any remedial actions taken or proposed; and (e) provide for discipline up to and including discharge of an employee or supervisor who violates Defendant's policy or policies against discrimination, harassment and retaliation, and for increasingly severe discipline of repeat offenders. 10. Defendant shall distribute to all of its employees and newly-hired employees its policy or policies against discrimination, harassment and retaliation within 45 days after entry of this Consent Decree. 11. 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
5

employees, will receive these policies and an opportunity to acknowledge receipt. Defendant will retain copies of any acknowledgment of receipt fonn for an employee in the employee's personnel file.
12. Defendant shall annually, for the duration of the Consent Decree, give a copy of its policy or policies against discrimination, harassment and retaliation to each employee.
Supervisor Accountability 13. Defendant 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 13; (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 personnel 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 and/or complaints of harassment and/or 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 ofTitle VII as fonows: (a) Defendant agrees to provide annual training sessions for any employee or employees at its SCECA work site responsible fOT responding to Title VII complaints made at SCECA by a qualified independent vendor in 2006 and in 2007. The training will cover
6

employee rights and employer obligations under both Title VII and relevant state or loca1 antidiscrimination laws, and will emphasize what constitutes unlawful harassment and discrimination in the workplace, how to keep the company free from such discrimination, what constitutes unlawful retaliation, and will sununarize how to conduct a prompt and effective investigation into allegations, complaints or charges ofdiscrimination;
(b) Defendant shall first provide training in accordance with Paragraph 13(a) by no later than ninety (90) calendar days after entry of this Consent Decree and also shall provide such training in calendar year 2007.
15. Defendant shall obtain the EEOC's approval of its proposed trainer prior to each year's training sessions.
16. Defendant agrees that, at its expense, it will provide the EEOC with copies of aU pamphlets, brochures, outlines or other written materials provided to attendees of training sessions.
17. Defendant shall certify to the EEOC in writing within 10 business days after the training sessions required by Paragraph 13 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 SCECA's work
site(s) responsible for J·esponding to Title VII complaints made at SCECA as of the date of the
training. Reporting
18. Defendant shall futnish to the EEOC the following written reports annually for a
7

period of thirty-six (36) months following entry of this Decree with the frrst report due twelve (12) months after entry of the Decree and the final report due thirty-six (36) months after entry of the Decree. Each such report shall contain:
(a) a certification by Defendant that the Notice required to be posted by 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 has disseminated the policy against discrimination, harassment and retaliation to all new employees, including temporary employees, hired within the past twelve (12) month period preceding the report; and
(c) a certification that Defendant has complied with training requirements 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) ofthe 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.
8

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 the Court in the event any individual is found in contempt for a violation ofthis 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-1847. 23. This Consent Decree shall be filed in the United States District Court for Middle District of PelIDsylvania and shall continue in effect for three (3) years. During this time, this Court shall retain jurisdiction over this matter and the parties for purposes of enforcing compliance with the Decree, including issuing such orders as lTIay 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' notice to the other party. Should any material disputes under this Decree remain unresolved after this three-year period, the term of the Decree shall be automatically extended (and the Court will retain jurisdiction of this matter to enforce the Consent Decree) until such time as all disputes have been resolved. 24. The Clerk of the District Court is hereby directed to send a file-stamped copy of this Consent Decree to counsel ofrecord. 25. Upon the expiration of the three-year time period in this Consent Decree, the
9

above captioned matter will be dismissed with prejudice.

For Plaintiff EEOC:

For Defendant SCECA Inc.:

James L. Lee
Deputy General Counsel

Gwendolyn Young Reams Associate General Counsel Wash., D.C.

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

~_~-G/oL.tfIlc~ ~cN81r

(quYS)

Regional Attorney
~O/~~

S

Triall..-A'nqlTI

Susanin, Widman & Brennan, P.C.

'1

455 S. Gulph Road

King ofPrussia, PA 19406

tiago-FI

(610) 337-4510

Trial Att

LEMPLO

CO ISSJON

Philadelphia District Office
21 S. 5th Street, Suite 400

Philadelphia, PAl 91 06

(2 I 5) 440-2828

~i-~c:~~
By the Court: ~J~ ~u~d~g~e~VV1~.i.l.'~-II~·a_ m--~J~ ~.~N~eal~o-n~-------------

Date:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

10

EXHIBIT A
NOTICE TO ALL SCECA INC EMPLOYEES
This Notice is posted pursuant to a Consent Decree entered by the federal court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania in EEOC v. Saw Creek Estates Community Assoc., InC., Civil Action Number 05-1847, resolving a lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC'') against Saw' Creek Estates Community Association, Inc. ("SCECA").
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.42 U.S.c. § 2000e et seq" as amended ("Title VII"), prohibits discrimination against employees and applicants for employment based upon national origin, sex, race, color or religion. Title VII further prohibits retaliation against elTlp\oyees or applicants who avail themselves of their rights under Title VII by engaging in protected activities. such as filing a charge of discrimination andlor testifying or participating in a Commission investigation. The EEOC is the federal agency which investigates charges of unlawful employment discrimination. The EEOC has the authority to bring lawsuits in federal court to enforce Title VII.
In its lawsuit, the EEOC alleged that SCECA subjected a female employee to harassment based on race and sex, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"). SCECA denies all these allegations andlor any habiJity.
To resolve the case, SCECA and the EEOC have entered into a Consent Decree which provided, among other things, that: (1) SCECA agrees that it will not discriminate on the basis of race and sex in the future; (2) SCECA will not retaliate against any person because he or she opposed any practice made unlawful by Title VII, filed a Title VII charge of discrimination, participated in any Title VII proceeding, or asserted any rights under the Consent Decree; and (3) SCECA will train any employee or employees at SCECA work site(s) with responsibility for responding to Title VII complaints made by SCECA employees regarding discrimination, harassment and retaliation, and regarding its policy prohibiting discrimination, harassment and retaliation.
If you believe you have been discriminated against, you may contact the EEOC at (215) 4402600. The EEOC charges no fees and has employees who speak languages other than English.
THIS IS AN OFFICIAL NOTICE AND MUST NOT BE DEFACED BY ANYONE
This Notice must remain posted for two (2) years from the date below and must not be altered, defaced or covered by any other material. Any questions about this Notice or compliance with its tenus Inay be directed to the EEOC, Philadelphia District Office, 21 South 5th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106.

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

SCECAInc.

 </s> Pennsylvania Middle District Version 3.0.5 - Docket Report

https://ecf.pamd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?253182174063384-L_...

CLOSED, SCR
U.S. District Court United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (Scranton)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:05-cv-01847-WJN

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc. Assigned to: Honorable William J. Nealon Cause: 42:1981 Job Discrimination (Race)

Date Filed: 09/13/2005 Date Terminated: 03/06/2006 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Iris Santiago Flores U.S. EEOC, Philadelphia District Office 21 S. 5th Street, Suite 400 Philadelphia, PA 19106 215- 440-2684 Fax: 215 440-2848 Email: iris.santiago-flores@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jacqueline H. McNair Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 21 S. 5th Street Suite 400 The Bourse Building Philadelphia, PA 19106 215-440-2670 Email: jacqueline.mcnair@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Judith A. O'Boyle Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 21 South 5th Street Suite 400 Philadelphia, PA 19106-2515 215-440-2669 Fax: 215-440-2674 Email: Judith.oboyle@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.

1 of 4

5/31/2007 11:20 AM

Pennsylvania Middle District Version 3.0.5 - Docket Report

https://ecf.pamd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?253182174063384-L_...

Defendant
Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc.

represented by John A. Adams Susanin, Widman & Brennan, P.C. 455 South Gulph Road Executive Terrace Suite 240 King of Prussia, PA 19406 (610) 337-4510 Email: jaadams@swbcounsellors.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mariellen D. Bello Susanin, Widman & Brennan, P.C. Suite 240-Executive terrace 455 South Gulph Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 610-337-4510 Email: mbello@swbcounsellors.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/13/2005
09/13/2005
09/13/2005 09/16/2005 10/17/2005 10/17/2005 10/18/2005
10/18/2005

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT against Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc. , filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(kn, ) (Entered: 09/13/2005)
Summons Issued as to Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc. and provided to Attorney Flores for service on Defendant(s). (kn, ) (Entered: 09/13/2005)
Judge Nealon has been assigned to this case. (jw, ) (Entered: 09/15/2005)
2 Letter Order to counsel re case assignment and proper procedures. Signed by Judge William J. Nealon on 9/16/05. (rk) (Entered: 09/16/2005)
3 STIPULATION to Extend Time to Respond to Answer by Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc.. (Adams, John) (Entered: 10/17/2005)
4 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Summons served on Defendant on 10/1/05, filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (ga, ) (Entered: 10/17/2005)
5 STIPULATION AND ORDER - Defendant's time to respond to the Complaint is extended through November 4, 2005. Signed by Judge William J. Nealon on 10/17/05. (ga, ) (Entered: 10/18/2005)
6 LETTER ORDER - A Case Management Conference is scheduled for Wednesday, 11/30/2005 at 11:00 AM before Honorable William J. Nealon. Signed by Judge William J. Nealon on 10/18/05. (rk) (Entered: 10/18/2005)

2 of 4

5/31/2007 11:20 AM

Pennsylvania Middle District Version 3.0.5 - Docket Report

https://ecf.pamd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?253182174063384-L_...

11/03/2005 11/16/2005
11/23/2005 11/28/2005
11/29/2005 12/06/2005
12/13/2005 12/23/2005 01/06/2006 03/02/2006
03/06/2006 03/06/2006

7 ANSWER to Complaint by Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(Adams, John) (Entered: 11/03/2005)
8 ORDER - The Case Management Conference has been rescheduled to Tuesday, 11/29/2005 at 2:30 PM before Honorable William J. Nealon. Signed by Judge William J. Nealon on 11/16/05. (rk) (Entered: 11/16/2005)
9 CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Flores, Iris) (Entered: 11/23/2005)
10 MOTION to Stay by Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Brief in Support of Motion# 2 Certification of Counsel# 3 Certificate of Service# 4 Proposed Order)(Adams, John) (Entered: 11/28/2005)
11 BRIEF IN SUPPORT re 10 MOTION to Stay filed by Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc..(bg, ) (Entered: 11/29/2005)
13 NOTICE of Appearance by Mariellen D. Bello on behalf of Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc. (Attachments: # 1)(Bello, Mariellen) (Entered: 12/06/2005)
14 BRIEF IN OPPOSITION re 10 MOTION to Stay filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.(Flores, Iris) (Entered: 12/13/2005)
15 REPLY BRIEF re 10 MOTION to Stay filed by Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1)(Bello, Mariellen) (Entered: 12/23/2005)
16 Letter to Judge Nealon from Mariellen Bello on behalf of the Defendant re Defendant's Motion to Stay. (bg, ) (Entered: 01/06/2006)
17 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Proposed Executed Consent Decree for Judge's Approval by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Flores, Iris) (Entered: 03/02/2006)
18 Consent Decree filed on 3/6/2006. (bg, ) (Entered: 03/06/2006)
19 ORDER. A consent decree having been approved and adopted, the court will retain jurisdiction in this matter for (3) years for purposes of enforcing compliance with the decree, including issuing such orders as may be required to effectuate its purposes. In the interim, the Clerk of Court is directed to administratively close the case.Signed by Judge William J. Nealon on 3/6/2006. (bg, ) (Entered: 03/06/2006)

3 of 4

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

05/31/2007 12:21:02

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code:

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

Billable Pages: 2

Cost:

eeoc 3:05-cv-01847-WJN 0.16

5/31/2007 11:20 AM

Pennsylvania Middle District Version 3.0.5 - Docket Report

https://ecf.pamd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?253182174063384-L_...

4 of 4

5/31/2007 11:20 AM


[CONTENT] EEOC | Philadelphia | Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc. | September 13, 2005 | the U.S. District Court | the Middle District | Pennsylvania ||| EEOC | Title VII | African American ||| March 6, 2006 | 30,000 | Title VII | Title VII | annually ||| three years ||| 2009 [SUMMARY] The EEOC's Philadelphia district office sued Saw Creek Estates Community Association, Inc., on September 13, 2005 in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.  The EEOC's complaint alleged that the defendant violated Title VII when it discriminated based on sex (female) and race (African American) by creating a racially and sexually hostile work environment, resulting in her discharge.  The parties entered into a consent decree on March 6, 2006, which stipulated that the defendant would pay the complainant $30,000 in damages, provide a neutral reference for the complainant, post a notice of compliance with Title VII, provide Title VII training to its managers, draft and distribute a non-discrimination policy, and annually report compliance with the consent decree. The decree was to last for three years. The docket sheet doesn't show any further enforcement took place; the case was presumably closed in 2009.

