Voorhees, Judge Richard L.

English

DigitalCommons@ILR

Cornell University ILR School 
DigitalCommons@ILR 
Consent Decrees Labor and Employment Law Program 
7-7-2012 
EEOC v. Caldwell Freight Lines 
Judge Richard L. Voorhees 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/condec 
Thank you for downloading this resource, provided by the ILR School's Labor and Employment 
Law Program. Please help support our student research fellowship program with a gift to the 
Legal Repositories! 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Labor and Employment Law Program at 
DigitalCommons@ILR. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consent Decrees by an authorized administrator of 
DigitalCommons@ILR. For more information, please contact catherwood-dig@cornell.edu. 
If you have a disability and are having trouble accessing information on this website or need materials in an 
alternate format, contact web-accessibility@cornell.edu for assistance. 
EEOC v. Caldwell Freight Lines 
Keywords 
EEOC, Caldwell Freight Lines, 5:11-CV-134, Western District of North Carolina, Transportation, Race, 
African American, Black, Disparate Impact, Hiring 
This article is available at DigitalCommons@ILR: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/condec/428 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA 
STATESVILLE DIVISION 
CASE NO. 5:11-CV-134
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT )
OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) CONSENT DECREE
)
CALDWELL FREIGHT LINES, )
INC., )
)
Defendant. )
__________________________________ )
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission’*) instituted this
action pursuant to Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as 
amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e-5(f)(l) and (3) ("Title VH”), and Section 102 of the Civil 
Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a. The Commission’s complaint alleged that Defendant, 
Caldwell Freight Lines, hie. ("Defendant”) discriminated against Desmond Burch and other 
similarly situated black applicants for employment, by refusing to hire them because of their 
race, black. On or about October 25, 2011, after this action was filed, Defendant filed for 
Chapter 7 Bankruptcy (Case No. 11-51312, in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, for the Western 
District of North Carolina). Consequently, counsel for Defendant is providing counsel to 
Defendant through the Trustee in Bankruptcy only, as Defendant has no employees, officers or 
directors. Li view of the foregoing, there are no other means of communication with Defendant 
regarding the Consent Decree, other than advising the Trustee in Bankruptcy. Counsel for 
Defendant has conferred with the Trastee in Bankruptcy regarding the Consent Decree, and is 
authorized to state he has no objection. By separate motion in the Bankruptcy proceeding, the
1
parties hereto, along with the Bankruptcy Trustee, will seek approval of the Consent Decree 
upon its entry in this District Court proceeding. The settlement amounts and Defendant’s 
attorney fees herein are being paid exclusively by Zurich American Insurance Company 
(Zurich), and said funds are excluded from the Bankruptcy proceeding.
The Commission and the Defendant hereby stipulate to jurisdiction of the Court over the 
parties and agree that the subject matter of this action is properly before the Court.
The parties have advised this Court that they desire to resolve the allegations in the 
Complaint without the burden, expense, and delay of further litigation.
It is therefore the finding of this Court, made on the pleadings and the record as a whole, 
that: (1) the Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action; (2) the 
purpose and provisions of Title VII will be promoted and effectuated by the entry of the Consent 
Decree; and (3) this Decree resolves all matters in controversy between the parties as provided in 
paragraphs 1 through 15 below.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows:
1. Defendant does not currently conduct business in any state within the United States or 
within any foreign jurisdiction. If Defendant resumes operation of a business subject to Title VH 
jurisdiction within the United States or within any foreign jurisdiction during the term of this 
Decree, Defendant agrees that it shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race or 
any other protected categoiy within the meaning of Title VH, including by failing to hire 
applicants because of their race.
2. Defendant does not currently conduct business in any state within the United States or 
within any foreign jurisdiction. If Defendant resumes operation of a business subject to Title VII 
jurisdiction within the United States or within any foreign jurisdiction during the term of this
2
Decree, Defendant agrees that it shall not discriminate or retaliate against any person because of 
opposition to any practice made unlawful under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or 
because of the filing of a charge, the giving of testimony or assistance, or the participation in any 
investigation, proceeding or hearing under that statute. Further, Defendant agrees that it shall not 
use applicants’ race as a decidhig factor in offering employment.
3. Defendant shall cause to be paid to Desmond Burch, Gerrod Shuford, Robert Tipps, 
Frankie Shuford, Tyon McGlown, and Kevin Odom the sum of One Hundred and Twenty 
Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($120,000.00) in settlement of the claims raised in this action. Of 
the foregoing One Hundred and Twenty Thousand and No/100 Dollars, Defendant shall pay 
Desmond Burch the sum of Thirty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($30,000.00) by issuing a 
check payable to Desmond Burch; Defendant shall pay Gerrod Shuford the sum of Eighteen 
Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($18,000.00) by issuing a check payable to Gerrod Shuford; 
Defendant shall pay Robert Tipps the sum of Eighteen Thousand and No/100 Dollars 
($18,000.00) by issuing a check payable to Robert Tipps; Defendant shall pay Frankie Shuford 
the sum of Eighteen Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($18,000.00) by issuing a check payable to 
Frankie Shuford; Defendant shall pay Tyon McGlown the sum of Eighteen Thousand and 
No/100 Dollars ($18,000.00) by issuing a check payable to Tyon McGown; and Defendant shall 
pay Kevin Odom the sum of Eighteen Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($18,000.00) by issuing a 
check payable to Kevin Odom. Payments shall be made by Zurich within (10) days after the 
Court approves this Consent Decree, and Defendant shall mail the checks to Desmond Burch, 
Gerrod Shuford, Robert Tipps, Frankie Shuford, Tyon McGlown, and Kevin Odom at addresses 
provided by the Commission. Within ten (10) days after checks have been sent, Defendant shall 
email to the Commission to EEOC-CTDO-decree-monitoring@eeoc.gov copies of the checks
3
and proof of their delivery to Desmond Burch, Gerrod Shuford, Robert Tipps, Frankie Shuford, 
Tyon McGlown, and Kevin Odom.
4. Defendant does not currently conduct business in any state within the United States or 
within any foreign jurisdiction. If Defendant resumes operation of a business subject to Title VII 
jurisdiction within the United States or within any foreign jurisdiction during the term of this 
Decree, Defendant agrees to provide the following, described in paragraphs 5 through 9 below. 
Defendant shall notify the EEOC within fifteen (15) days of resuming business operations.
5. Before ceasing its business operation, Defendant had in place an antidiscrimination 
policy, identified as “Discrimination/Harassment Policy,” copy of which is attached to this 
Decree as Exhibit A. Within thirty (30) days after resuming business operations in any state 
within the United States or within any foreign jurisdiction, Defendant shall revise its current 
“Discrimination/Harassment Policy” to include, but not be limited to, the following: an 
explanation of the requirements of the federal equal employment opportunity laws, including 
Title VH and its prohibition against racial discrimination, and different terms and conditions of 
employment based on race; procedures for reporting discrimination; the inclusion of multiple 
avenues by which employees can submit complaints of discrimination; procedures for 
investigating complaints of discrimination; and a statement addressing the anti-retaliation 
provisions under federal equal employment opportunity laws, including Title VII. Defendant 
shall distribute the revised policy to all current employees within 30 days of its completed 
revision. Within forty-five (45) days of the completed revision, Defendant shall report 
compliance of the foregoing to the Commission. If during the term of this Decree Defendant 
resumes business, Defendant shall also distribute the revised policy to all new employees and 
review it with them at the time of hire.
4
6. If Defendant resumes operation of a business in any state within the United States or 
within any foreign jurisdiction, after resuming operations, Defendant shall post a copy of the 
policy described in paragraph 5, supra, in all of their facilities in a place where it is visible to 
employees. If the policy becomes defaced or unreadable, Defendant shall replace it by posting 
another copy of the policy. Within fifteen (15) days after resuming business operations in any 
state within the United States or within any foreign jurisdiction, Defendant will post the policy 
and notify the EEOC that it has been posted.
7. If Defendant resumes operation of a business in any state within the United States or 
within any foreign jurisdiction, after resuming operations, Defendant shall provide an annual 
training program to all of its managers, supervisors and employees. Each training program shall 
include an explanation of the requirements of Title VE of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and its 
prohibition against race discrimination and retaliation in the workplace. Each Earning program 
shall also include an explanation of Defendant’s policy referenced in paragraph 5 above, and an 
explanation of the rights and responsibilities of employees and managers under the policy. The 
first training program shall be completed within thirty (30) days after resuming business 
operations in any state within the United States or within any foreign jurisdiction. Each 
subsequent training program shall be conducted at approximately one-year intervals. At least 
fifteen (15) days prior to each program, Defendant shall provide the Commission with an agenda 
for the training program. Within ten (10) days after completion of each training program, 
Defendant shall certify to the Commission the specific training which was undertaken and shall 
provide the Commission with a roster of all employees in attendance.
8. If Defendant resumes operation of a business in any state within the United States or 
within any foreign jurisdiction, beginning within thirty (30) days after resuming operations and
5
continuing throughout the term of this Decree, Defendant shall conspicuously post the attached 
Employee Notice, marked Exhibit B, hereby made a part of this Decree, in each of its facilities 
and at each worksite in a place where it is visible to employees. If the Notice becomes defaced or 
unreadable, Defendant shall replace it by posting another copy of the Notice. Within fifteen (15) 
days after resuming operations in any state within the United ,States or within any foreign 
jurisdiction, Defendant shall notify the Commission that the Notice has been posted pursuant to 
this provision.
9. If Defendant resumes operation of a business in any state within the United States or 
within any foreign jurisdiction, after resuming operations and continuing throughout the term of 
this Decree, Defendant shall provide the Commission with reports at six (6) month intervals, 
with the fust being due four (4) months after resuming business operation. The reports will 
include the following information:
(a) the identities of all applicants for employment with Defendant:
i. for each applicant, include by way of identification each person's name, address, 
and telephone number;
ii. for each applicant, a statement of whether the individual was immediately offered 
employment and/or immediately hired;
iii. for each applicant, provide a copy of the applicant's application and/or resume; 
and
(b) the identities of all individuals hired by Defendant, including by way of identification
each person’s name, address, telephone number, social security number, and race;
(c) the identities of all individuals who have complained of race discrimination:
i. for each individual, include by way of identification each person’s name, address, 
and telephone number;
ii. a detailed statement of the individual’s complaint, and
6
iii, a detailed statement of the action that was taken in response to the individual’s 
complaint
In the event there is no activity to report pursuant to this paragraph. Defendant shall send 
the Commission a “negative” report indicating no activity.
10. The Commission may review compliance with this Decree. As part of such review, the 
Commission may inspect Defendant’s facilities and work sites, interview employees and 
examine and copy documents.
11. If anytime during the term of this Decree, the Commission believes that Defendant is in 
violation of the Decree, the Commission shall give notice of the alleged violation to Defendant. 
Defendant shall have ten (10) days in which to investigate and respond to the allegations. 
Thereafter, the parties shall then have a period of ten (10) days or such additional period as may 
be agreed upon by them, in which to engage in negotiation regarding such allegations before the 
Commission exercises any remedy provided by law.
12. The term of this Decree shall be for five (5) years from its entry by the Court.
13. All reports or other documents sent to the Commission by Defendant pursuant to this 
Consent Decree shall be sent by electronic mail to: (1) EEOC“CTDO“decreemonitoring@ 
eeoc.gov; or (2) if by regular mail to - Lynette A. Barnes, Regional Attorney, Equal Employment 
Opportunity Commission, 129 West Trade Street, Suite 400, Charlotte, NC 28202.
14. Each party shall bear its own costs and attorney’s fees.
7
15. This Court shall retain jurisdiction of this cause for purposes of monitoring compliance 
with this Decree and entry of such further orders as may be necessary or appropriate.
Signed: July 13, 2012
8


EEOC v. Caldwell Freight Lines

https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1455&amp;context=condec

EEOC v. Caldwell Freight Lines

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@ILR