Dive Brief:
- Worldwide Printing and Distribution, doing business as ResourceOne in Tulsa, Oklahoma, will pay $47,500 to settle allegations it violated the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by subjecting a mixed-race employee to harassment because of her African ancestry, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced Aug. 14.
- While at work, the employee showed her supervisor the results of an at-home DNA test, which indicated she had a small percentage of ancestry from Cameroon, the Congo and Northern Africa, according to the complaint in EEOC v. Worldwide Printing and Distribution, Inc. Afterward, the supervisor allegedly began using ethnic slurs and made other abusive remarks, the complaint alleged. The harassment was allegedly non-stop, and the employee was forced to quit, the lawsuit said.
- EEOC sued ResourceOne for violating GINA, which prohibits harassment based on genetic information, and Title VII, which prohibits harassment based on race or perceived race and national origin or perceived national origin, the agency said. Under a consent decree, ResourceOne will pay the employee $2,175 in backpay and $45,325 in compensatory damages.
Dive Insight:
GINA claims account for only a small number of charges filed with EEOC. But with ancestry services and at-home DNA testing kits now widely available, some employees who use them may share the results at work — setting the stage for a potential GINA claim, as the EEOC alleged here.
While employers may be generally aware that GINA prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of genetic information, it also includes broad restrictions. The law prohibits employers from discriminating against an employee or job applicant based on genetic information in “any aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoffs, training, fringe benefits, or any other term or condition of employment,” according to an EEOC guidance.
Relevant to the instant case, GINA also prohibits harassment based on genetic information and retaliation against someone for opposing discrimination, the guidance adds.
Here, the employee asked her supervisor to stop the harassment, but it continued, and the supervisor began assigning her less favorable job duties, the EEOC alleged. It also alleged the employee complained to the shift manager, but he allegedly ignored her complaint and mocked her as well.
“Educating workers is key to ending on-the-job harassment,” David Davis, director of the EEOC’s St. Louis District office, stated in the announcement. The consent decree “not only requires ResourceOne to proactively work to prevent discrimination and harassment, but it also requires the company to educate employees about their rights,” Davis said.
Under the consent decree, ResourceOne, a commercial printing, direct mailing and direct marketing company, must adopt policies and enforcement procedures prohibiting discrimination and harassment based on race, national origin and genetic information. It must also provide a minimum of two, one-hour training sessions annually for all supervisory and HR employees.
One area where employers may unwittingly get GINA compliance wrong is requests for medical information from an employee or job applicant, such as ones made to verify a Family and Medical Leave Act or disability accommodation request, an attorney previously told HR Dive.
To protect itself against a potential violation, an employer needs to communicate that it isn’t asking for genetic information in those instances, the attorney suggested.