Employers, EEOC Gear UP for High Court Showdown

At issue is whether and to what extent may a court enforce the EEOC’s mandatory duty to conciliate discrimination claims before filing suit.

The Supreme Court has agreed to weigh in on the EEOC’s gender discrimination lawsuit against Mach, an Illinois-based coal mining company. Law.com reports that Mach’s lawyers urged the justices to take the case, arguing that the EEOC didn’t live up to its unique statutory duty to “conciliate in good faith”—i.e., to try to resolve a dispute fairly before filing suit. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit shut down Mach’s line of attack in December, favoring limited judicial review of the EEOC’s conciliation efforts.

According to prominent employment defense lawyer Gerald Maatman Jr., the Seventh Circuit’s ruling has already emboldened the EEOC in its dealings with other defendants in the Midwest. Maatman said the court’s approach to judicial oversight allows the EEOC to be “very aggressive and very difficult to deal with” during settlement talks. The agency can refuse to budge from its demands or even explain them, Maatman said, because it doesn’t have to worry about a judge assessing whether it was sufficiently conciliatory. In other jurisdictions, where the EEOC’s failure to conciliate can be grounds for automatic dismissal, the agency plays it more safe, Maatman said.

For more information, visit FarmEquip.org7-1. S