#employees #laborlaw #employmentlaw #employmentnews #employmentlawyer #laborlaws #lawsuit #uscourts #employees_news #employment_news
#employmentlawyer #retaliation #hostileworkenvironment #discriminationlawsuit #discriminationcase #workplacebullying #workplacediscrimination #awardwinning #courtproceedings #legaleducation #legalinsights #legalnews #legaltips #legalinsights #legal #legalservices
👉Parties: TAHVIO GRATTON, an individual, Plaintiff, v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Defendant.
👉Lawyers: The case, Gratton v. UPS, was filed and litigated by Seattle attorneys Robin J. Shishido and Rick E. Goldsworthy of Shishido Taren Goldsworthy PLLC (https://www.shishidotaren.com/contact) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. Closer to trial, the team was joined by Dustin Collier and Drew Teti of Collier Socks, LLP (https://www.collierlawsf.com/contact), a California firm experienced in high-value employment trials, with Dustin Collier serving as lead trial counsel.
UPS was represented by the Portland, Ore., office of Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart PC, together with Lewis Brisbois in Seattle.
______________________________________
Practice Areas:
Labor Law, Employee Retaliation Lawsuit
Main Topics:
Tahvio Gratton V. UPS, Discrimination Case, Racial Discrimination Lawsuit, Hostile Work Environment, Retaliation Claim, Washington Law Against Discrimination Case, Wrongful Termination, Discrimination Lawsuit Seattle Yakima, Racial Discrimination Employment Law, EEOC Retaliation Complaints, Hostile Workplace Allegations, Discriminatory Employment Practices, Punitive Damages Discrimination Case, Employee Rights Discrimination, retaliation lawsuit against employer, workplace retaliation lawsuit, how to prove retaliation in the workplace, different types of retaliation.
Summary:
In Tahvio Gratton V. UPS, the plaintiff filed a Racial Discrimination Lawsuit against United Parcel Service (UPS), claiming a Racial Discrimination, Hostile Work Environment, Wrongful Termination and Retaliation. Gratton, a driver in Seattle and Yakima, Washington, alleged that he faced racial discrimination and harassment. He reported that his complaints, including derogatory comments from a supervisor, were ignored, leading to further retaliation. In 2021, Gratton was fired after a UPS Sexual Harassment Allegation, which he claimed was fabricated as pretext for his dismissal. He filed under 42 U.S.C. 1981 and the Washington Law Against Discrimination.
The court dismissed Gratton's racial discrimination and hostile work environment claims but upheld his retaliation claim. The jury later awarded Gratton $237.6 million, including $198 million in punitive damages. This discrimination Case highlights important lessons for employers on handling grievances and ensuring legitimate reasons for terminations. For employees, it underscores the importance of documenting EEOC Retaliation Complaints and being prepared with evidence when pursuing a retaliation lawsuit against an employer.
________________________________________
Disclaimer:
The content on this YouTube channel and/or related web sites (collectively: "the Sites”) is for general education only. The Sites are not a law firm and not a lawyer referral service; nor are they a substitute for hiring an attorney or law firm. Any information displayed or provided on the Sites is for personal use only. The Sites offer no legal, business, or tax advice, recommendations, mediation, or counseling in connection with any legal matter, under any circumstances, and nothing we do, and no element of the Sites should be construed as such.
The Sites are NOT being paid by any of the attorneys, law firms, and legal service providers (collectively, "Third Party Legal Professionals") mentioned on the Sites, unless expressly stated otherwise in writing. The Sites do not endorse or recommend any Third-Party Legal Professionals mentioned on the Sites. Your use of the Sites is not intended to create, and any information submitted to the Sites and/or any electronic or other communication sent to the Sites will not create a contract for representation or an attorney-client relationship between you and the Sites or any of the Third-Party Legal Professionals.
The characters, events, places, and names depicted in this video are taken from the corresponding court decision. However, the images in this video are entirely fictitious and any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead is purely coincidental.
The Sites are intended for use by U.S. residents and comply with U.S. laws only.
All original content, including text, images, and videos, is protected under copyright law and may not be reproduced without permission.
Notice: Some case summaries available on this channel were written with the help of AI, which may produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
Информация по комментариям в разработке