Baylson, Judge Michael M.

English

DigitalCommons@ILR

Cornell University ILR School 
DigitalCommons@ILR 
Consent Decrees Labor and Employment Law Program 
Spring 3-31-2014 
EEOC v. Market Burgers, L.L.C., 
Judge Michael M. Baylson 
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. Market Burgers, L.L.C., 
Keywords 
EEOC v. Market Burgers, L.L.C., 13-cv-4651, Sex, Female, Compensation, Disparate Treatment, Terms and 
Conditions of Employment, Title VII, Consent Decree 
This article is available at DigitalCommons@ILR: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/condec/427 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
C a se  2 :1 3 -c v -0 4 6 5 1 -M M B  D ocum ent 14  Filed 0 4 /0 1 /1 4  P ag e  1 of 7
/p fY O C } C ase 2:13-cv -04651-M M B  Docum ent 12 Filed 0 3 /2 7 /1 4  Page 1 of 7
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY )
COMMISSION )
)
)
This action was instituted by Plaintiff, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity 
Commission (“the EEOC” or the “Commission”), against Defendant, Market Burgers, L.L.C., 
d/b/a “Checkers” (“Defendant”). The Commission alleges violations of Sections 703(a)(1) and 
704(a) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 
2000e-2(a)(l) and 2000e-3(a), and of the Equal Pay Act (“the EPA”), as incorporated into the 
Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 206(d)(1) and 215(a)(2).
The EEOC’s Complaint alleges that Defendant discriminated against LaToya Snyder and 
a class of female employees by paying them lower wages than those paid to their male 
counterparts for equal work which requires the same levels of skill, effort, and responsibility. 
The Complaint further alleges that Defendant discriminated against LaToya Snyder and a class of 
female employees by suppressing their wages through discriminatory job assignments and 
subjecting them to inferior terms and conditions of employment based on their sex.
The Commission and Defendant desire to resolve this action without the time and
expense of continued litigation, and they desire to formulate a plan to be embodied in a Decree 
which will promote and effectuate the purposes of Title VII and the EPA.
The Court has examined this Decree and finds that it is reasonable and just and in 
accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Title VII and the EPA. Therefore, upon 
due consideration of the record herein and being fully advised in the premises, it is hereby 
ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:
1. This Decree resolves all issues and claims alleged in the Complaint filed by the 
Commission in this action, which emanated from the Charge of Discrimination filed by LaToya 
Snyder, Charge No. 530-2011-01209.
2. This Decree shall be in effect for a period of three years from the date it is entered 
by the Court.
3. Defendant, its officers, agents, servants, employees, successors, assigns, and all
persons acting or claiming to act on its behalf, are hereby enjoined from violating Title VII with
regard to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment of its female employees.
Discrimination with regard to terms, conditions, and privileges of employment violates Title VII,
which sets forth in relevant part:
It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer . .. 
to discriminate against any individual with respect to h[er] 
compensation, teims, conditions, or privileges of employment, 
because of such individual’s . . .  sex[.]
42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(l).
4. Defendant, its officers, agents, servants, employees, successors, assigns, and all 
persons acting or claiming to act on its behalf, are hereby enjoined from violating the EPA, 
which sets forth in relevant part:
C a s e  2 : l3 -c v -0 4 6 5 l-M M B  D ocum ent 14  Filed 0 4 /0 1 /1 4  P a g e  2 of 7
2
C a se  2 :1 3 -c v -0 4 6 5 1 -M M B  D ocum ent 14  Filed 0 4 /0 1 /1 4  P ag e  3 of 7
C ase 2:13-cv -04651-M M B  Docum ent 12 Filed 0 3 /2 7 /1 4  P a g e  3 o f7
No employer. . .  shall discriminate. . .  between employees on the basis of sex by 
paying wages to employees . . .  at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages 
to employees of the opposite sex for equal work on jobs the performance of 
which requires equal, skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed 
under similar working conditions.
29 U.S.C. § 206(d)(1).
5. Every six (6) months following the entry of this Consent Decree, and 
continuing throughout the life of the Decree, Defendant shall submit written reports to the 
Commission’s counsel of record concerning the implementation of this Decree. The reports 
shall include the following information: (1) Copies of any formal or informal complaints of 
wage discrimination based on sex or sex-based discrimination in job assignments, by any 
employee of Defendant, including but not limited to internal complaints, administrative 
charges, and lawsuits, and (2) for every complaint, whether oral or written, the name of the 
complainant, and a detailed explanation of Defendant’s actions taken in response to the 
complaint.
6. Defendant will pay three installments totaling $100,000 to be structured as 
follows:
a. Within ten (10) days after entry of this Decree, the EEOC will provide Defendant with the 
names, addresses, and payment allocations of all claimants to receive the first installment of 
$30,000. Defendant will make these payments within twenty (20) days of receipt of the 
EEOC’s information.
b. Within forty (40) days after entry of this Decree, the EEOC will provide to Defendant with 
the names, addresses, and payment allocations of all claimants to receive the second 
installment of $30,000. Defendant will make these payments within twenty (20) days of 
receipt of the EEOC’s information.
3
c. Within seventy (70) days after entry of this Decree, the EEOC will provide to Defendant 
with the names, addresses, and payment allocations of all claimants to receive the third and 
final installment of $40,000. Defendant will make these payments within fifty (50) days of 
receipt of the EEOC’s information.
d. $80,606 of this amount represents back pay for the aggrieved class members/claimants, as 
identified by the EEOC. $19,394 represents damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1981a for the 
aggrieved class members/claimants, as identified by the EEOC. For the back pay portions, 
Defendant will make the appropriate withholdings, and issue an IRS form W-2 for the 2014 
tax year. For the non-wage, compensatory damages allocations, no withholdings will be made 
and Defendant shall prepare and distribute IRS Form 1099s to claimants receiving 
compensatory damages, as identified by the EEOC.
7. Effective April 30, 2014, the hourly wages of Cashier/Sandwich Makers in 
Defendant’s Checkers restaurant in Philadelphia will be increased to $7.50, the wage rate 
Defendant pays to males performing equal work, and Defendant will agree to pay this hourly 
wage to all incoming Cashier/Sandwich Makers hired at that facility during the life of this 
Decree.
8. Within sixty (60) days after the entry of this Decree, Defendant will provide
training, led by an outside attorney or consultant previously agreed to by the parties, for all
owners of Market Burgers, L.L.C., which shall focus on compliance with Title VII’s and the
Equal Pay Act’s prohibition against sex-based wage discrimination, with an emphasis on the
prohibition against making job assignments based on sex-based stereotypes. The duration of the
training will be five hours. Within seven (7) business days of the training’s completion,
Defendant will provide certification to the Commission’s counsel of record that such training has
4
C a s e  2 : l3 -c v -0 4 6 5 l-M M B  D ocum ent 14  Filed 0 4 /0 1 /1 4  P a g e  4  of 7
7been provided, including the date[s] and locations] of the training, and the identities of the
trainees and trainers.
9. Within thirty (30) days after entry of this Decree, Defendant shall adopt and 
adhere to a written anti-discrimination policy that comports with all requirements of Title VII 
and the EPA.
10. Within ten (10) days after entry of this Decree, Defendant will post 
immediately, in all places where notices to employees customarily are posted within 
Defendant’s Checkers restaurant, the Notice attached hereto and made a part hereof. Said 
Notices shall be posted and maintained for the life of the Consent Decree and shall be signed 
by a responsible management official with the date of actual posting shown thereon. Should 
the Notices become defaced, marred, or otherwise made unreadable, Defendant will ensure 
that new, readable copies of the Notices are posted in the same manner as heretofore 
specified. Within thirty (30) days of approval of this Decree, Defendant shall forward to the 
EEOC’s attorney of record a copy of the signed Notice attached hereto and written 
certification that the Notice referenced herein has been posted and a statement of the 
locations and dates of posting.
Subject to these provisions and this Court’s jurisdiction to enforce the provisions of this 
Consent Decree, it is further
ORDERED that this case shall be and hereby is dismissed with prejudice, with the 
Commission and Defendant each bearing their own costs and fees.
SO ORDERED
5
By:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
The undersigned counsel of record in the above-captioned action hereby consent, on 
behalf of their respective clients, to the entry of the foregoing Consent Decree.
FOR DEFENDANT: FOR PLAINTIFF:
YY)
John M. Borelli
Segal, McCambridge, Singer & Mahoney 
1818 Market Street, Suite 2600 
Philadelphia, PA 19103
/s/ Debra Lawrence 
Debra M. Lawrence 
Regional Attorney
/s/ Maria Luisa Morocco 
Maria Luisa Morocco 
Supervisory Trial Attorney
/s/ Philip M. Kovnat________________
Philip M. Kovnat
Jennifer Hope
Trial Attorneys
Philadelphia District Office
801 Market Street, Penthouse Suite 1300
Philadelphia, PA 19107
6
C ase
C ase
13-CV-04651-MMB
:13-cv-04651-MMB
Docum ent 14 
Document 12
7
U.S. EQ U A L
/ V '  M B x \
EM PLO Y M EN T
"S. Isk/'- i; ' F" W  O’ 
Ta  1 v /
O PPO R TU N ITY
ry C O M M ISSIO N
POSTED PURSUANT TO FEDERAL COURT ORDER
This Notice is posted pursuant to a federal court 
order voluntarily resolving a sex discrimination 
lawsuit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment 
Opportunity Commission (the EEOC), an agency 
of the federal government, against Market 
Burgers, L.L.C. In that lawsuit, called EEOC v. 
Market Burgers. L.L.C.. Case No. 13-CV-4651 
(U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of 
Pennsylvania), the EEOC alleged that Market 
Burgers, L.L.C., violated Title VII of the Civil 
Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Pay Act of 
1963 by subjecting a class of female employees 
to lower wages and inferior working conditions 
because of their sex. Under Section 706 of Title 
VII, it is unlawful for an employer to
“discriminate against any individual with respect 
to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges 
of employment, because of such individual’s . . . 
sex.”
Date Posted:
By:_________________
Market Burgers, L.L.C.
Also, under the Equal Pay Act,
“[n]o employer . . .  shall discriminate . . .  
between employees on the basis of sex by 
paying wages to employees . . .  at a rate 
less than the rate at which he pays wages 
to employees of the opposite sex for 
equal work.”
Market Burgers, L.L.C. WILL NOT 
engage in any acts or practices made 
unlawful by the above sections.
A copy of this Notice will be posted in a 
conspicuous place where employee 
notices are ordinarily placed and will be 
replaced if it becomes defaced, marred, or 
otherwise made unreadable.
7


EEOC v. Market Burgers, L.L.C.,

https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1456&amp;context=condec

EEOC v. Market Burgers, L.L.C.,

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@ILR