United Airlines has reached a settlement in a federal discrimination lawsuit filed by the EEOC that alleged one of its managers directed racial slurs and threats at a Mongolian American employee working in Denver catering.
According to court documents, the dispute centers on Alsunbayar Davaabat, a Mongolian native who moved to the United States in 1996 and became a naturalized citizen in 2009. United hired him in 2019 as a catering truck driver, and he reported that his colleagues regularly called him “Chinaman” instead of using his real name. This derogatory behavior allegedly persisted for at least six months before coworkers started using a shortened form of his actual name.
Denver International Airport
Things got worse with Covid. His manager reportedly shouted, “What did you say chink?” after Davaabat briefly removed his mask at the end of his lunch break. The lawsuit contends the manager grabbed and twisted Davaabat’s arm, implying he could have the man fired. His line supervisor failed to reassure that an investigation would take place. He gave two weeks’ notice and left.
United did eventually open an investigation, leading to the manager’s departure in July 2021. The manager retired in lieu of being terminated. The catering employee was offered his job back.
The airline did the right thing! But the EEOC asserted that United had not acted quickly enough to address the harassment or to reassure the victim that any corrective measures would be taken. Their lawsuit settled:
- $95,000
- Plus 75,000 MileagePlus frequent flyer miles
- Improved workplace policies to protect against harassment and discrimination
- A 72-hour investigation window for any complaint of workplace violence
- Regular compliance reports submitted by United to the EEOC
- Increased communication to employees about revised equal employment opportunity policies
United Airlines Economy Plus
The consent decree imposes a legal obligation on the airline to heightened anti-discrimination standards beyond those otherwise clearly provided for in law and an obligation to promptly investigate any new allegations.
And those 75,000 miles? Those don’t go nearly as far as they did when the reported discrimination first occurred nearly four years ago.
(HT: Paddle Your Own Kanoo)
Only 75,000 miles? At breakeven, that’s like just $750-worth. If only the aggressor had included an ‘Oriental’ or a ‘ching-chong ding-dong’ the victim may have gotten more. *GONG* Glad he got paid.
Very rare that the EEOC gets involved. Most of the time they issue a “right to sue” letter and close the file. When the EEOC fights, many times, its to assert an alleged infringement of the EEOC’s rights, not because of any desire to help the employee. The EEOC is mostly bureaucratic garbage and useless.
Why do you publish the uncensored slur for Chinese, whereas if the victim had been Black, you would have surely censored the slur?
In any case, let’s always remember labor and employment laws in the US are heavily tilted in favor of employers, harassers, and abusers. It’s rare for a victim to get anywhere beyond (as derek says) a piece of paper. So, for every victim who actually recovers damages, there are scores more who simply didn’t bother due to the ineffective process.
We need 1000x more employee rights in this country than we currently have.
I’m would not say United did the right thing. They had to settle a lawsuit that was not what they wanted to do. The manager escaped punishment by leaving. It sounds like others also were insulting and creating a hostile work environment. With what was described, I see little chance of the work culture of United changing. No wonder he did not take the job back.
United got off very lightly in this case. The 75k miles do not represent a “fine” they had to pay, and $95k in compensation is nowhere near what a competent lawyer could have gotten this man, assuming no curly bits beyond what Gary reports.
@Eileen
For better or worse, rarely does VFTW (Gary) censor much of anything. Several weeks ago a commenter explicitly used the n-word (with a hard-r) and it’s still there. Go for a look.
Besides, with the way the world is going, surely, you must know that the racists, bigots, and hate-mongers are winning. Freedom of speech now means freedom to practice hate.
Literally, today, one of the leading social media companies decided to do away with fact-checking and other moderation.
Regardless, I agree with you, we should be better than this. However, apparently, we are not in-fact better. This is us. So, beat ‘em or join ‘em.
Add a ‘0’ to both the financial settlement figure and the miles awarded and the total settlement rises slightly above the insult level.
This settlement is unfair to the employee. To be honest the manager should have been fired. Had it been a different person of color I’m sure the settlement would be a lot higher and this would definitely be the media. Also 75k miles really should be at least 5x that… a lot of mileage redemption are high… actually if I was this guy I’d ask for a full cash settlement as I would avoid UA.
In other news united challenges the ruling and instead offers 5000 miles for worldwide
Redemption travel
This person deserved more compensation for how egregious this really is. Now I know it’s just casual banter around the View crowd, but it’s not cool to be mean.
Ticket prices just went up for United.
(Re-post, potentially with paragraphs this time)
For those interested in the actual Consent Decree (and unwilling to pay the PACER fees): https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69132332/16/equal-employment-opportunity-commission-v-united-airlines-inc/. Case is EEOC v. United Airlines (1:24-cv-02438-RMR).
Details on the settlement:
1. Monetary individual relief of $46,375 economic and non-pecuniary (e.g. emotional or psychological distress) compensatory damages. $46,375 of back pay, and $6,250 in attorney’s fees.
2. Expunged personnel file for defendant for any and all references to the allegations…and [defendant’s] participation in [the EEOC suit].
3. Job reference limited to dates of employment and final job title.
4. 75,000 Mileage Plus miles.
5. Equitable relief prohibiting United from repeating such behavior, prohibiting reprisal, mandating consultant review of EEO policies, mandating update to workplace violence policy, various annual training for different employee groups (2.5 hours on Title VII for it’s DIA third-party catering service and 3 hours for DIA HR personnel, 2 hours on accepted professional standards for United’s corporate investigation team), posting of a notice (Exhibit A) in DIA’s HR and Corporate Investigative Group workplaces for 3 years, requirement to discipline and employ at DIA who engages in harassment or retaliation.
6. Delivery of reports to the EEOC on complaints of harassment, training, positing of notice, policy review, and individual relief for the next 2 years 5 months.
Given that United offered to reinstate employment at the end of its investigation, I suspect the back pay was calculated from Davaabat’s departure on January 25, 2021, until the offer was extended (likely in mid-to-late July of that year).
75K? Why bother including that in the settlement? It’s like Hostess throwing in a dozen boxes of Twinkies as part of a settlement.
@T, thank you for the additional information. I hope Mr. Davaabat has found employment that is acceptable and considers him a valuable employee. I also hope that Mr. Davaabat can take the settlement and use it to essentially fund his retirement accounts at the maximum rate over several years. I still think that the compensatory damages exclusive of the back pay were too little. The EEOC lawyers have a different agenda in the settlement so that may be why the numbers were what they were. If Mr. Davaabat had sued with a labor lawyer or a labor lawyer group, there is no certainty that he would have prevailed.
So a naturalized citizen gets a plum job driving and natural born citizens have to do the dirty work. Hired based on diversity not merit. I’m surprised anybody in that department was working.
@Gene, what facts do you have to show the basis on which the individual was hired? Your presumption is that a person not born in the US is per se less qualified than a person born in the US. I suppose Albert Einstein displaced some natural born professor at Princeton. I suppose Elon Musk displaced some natural born engineer when he illegally entered the US. I suppose Ramaswamy’s parents displaced some natural born person. I suppose Alexander Hamilton displaced some natural born person in his days. Or, is it okay if such people are white and of European descent . . . as Laura Loomer would offer? How would you feel if the alternative candidates for the guy’s driving job were black or Asian and natural born citizens? Will the number of generations in the US make a person more worthy than others? Does their faith come into play?
@Gene, you must be trolling
1) Driving is hardly a plum job
2) One would have to be incredibly nativist to postulate a difference between a naturalized and a natural born citizen for a job (excluding constitution mandates)
3) What the devil does this have to do with diversity or merit?