Case: United States of America v. Webb County, Texas and Webb County Juvenile Board

NA | No Court

Filed Date: 2000

Closed Date: 2000

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

Prior to 1997, the EEOC received five charges against Webb County, under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. On December 4, 1997, the EEOC found that there was reasonable cause to believe that Webb County engaged in gender discrimination, when it solicited only female applicants for the position of child care worker. In February 1997, the case was referred to the DOJ. By letter of August 27, 1999, The DOJ alleged that Webb County's practice of filling of all child care worker position based on…

Prior to 1997, the EEOC received five charges against Webb County, under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. On December 4, 1997, the EEOC found that there was reasonable cause to believe that Webb County engaged in gender discrimination, when it solicited only female applicants for the position of child care worker. In February 1997, the case was referred to the DOJ. By letter of August 27, 1999, The DOJ alleged that Webb County's practice of filling of all child care worker position based on sex constituted discrimination against both male and female applicants, and practice or pattern of discrimination.

Although the case is no longer included in the DOJ list, it previously showed that on May 26, 2000, the United States, Webb County and Webb County Juvenile Board (WCJB) entered into a settlement agreement. Under the agreement,Webb County had to designate only one male and one female child care worker per shift at the County's Juvenile Detention Center for duties, such as strip search. All other child care positions had to be filled without regard to gender. The county had to notify all past applicants to the positions of child care workers of new policies, and invite them to reapply for future vacancies. The county also agreed to provide annual reports for 3 years, describing the hiring procedures, and the name and sex of applicants and people hired for the positions of child care workers. The county had to retain records necessary for monitoring compliance with the agreements for the duration of the agreement. The DOJ reserved a right to monitor compliance. The DOJ agreed to release all claims based on the facts of the matter.

Summary Authors

Zhandos Kuderin (7/10/2014)

People


Judge(s)

Garza, Jesus (Texas)

Martinez, Mercurio Jr. (Texas)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Fenton, William B. (District of Columbia)

Lee, Bill Lann (District of Columbia)

Leggott, Charles E. (District of Columbia)

Judge(s)

Garza, Jesus (Texas)

Martinez, Mercurio Jr. (Texas)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Fenton, William B. (District of Columbia)

Lee, Bill Lann (District of Columbia)

Leggott, Charles E. (District of Columbia)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Settlement Agreement

April 21, 2000

April 21, 2000

Settlement Agreement

Resources

Docket

Last updated May 12, 2022, 8 p.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: Texas

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Key Dates

Filing Date: 2000

Closing Date: 2000

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

United States government

Plaintiff Type(s):

U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Webb County (Webb), County

Defendant Type(s):

Corrections

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e

Special Case Type(s):

Out-of-court

Availably Documents:

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Private Settlement Agreement

Order Duration: 2000 - None

Content of Injunction:

Utilize objective hiring/promotion criteria

Reporting

Recordkeeping

Monitoring

Follow recruitment, hiring, or promotion protocols

Discrimination Prohibition

Comply with advertising/recruiting requirements

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Pattern or Practice

Discrimination-area:

Hiring

Discrimination-basis:

Sex discrimination

Affected Gender:

Female

Male