Mueller, cleaning company agree to $150,000 settlement in EEOC sexual harassment suit

Mueller, cleaning company agree to $150,000 settlement in EEOC sexual harassment suit

A Delaware-based company with a factory in Albertville, and a South Carolina-based cleaning services company, have agreed to pay $150,000 in a settlement involving a lawsuit brought earlier this year by the U.S. Equal Employment Opporunity Commission (EEOC).

The agency said today that Mueller Co. and IH Services, which provides cleaning services in Mueller facilities, will also provide other relief to settle claims of sexual harassment and retaliation.

According to the lawsuit, IH Services assigned three female janitors to work at Mueller’s Albertville fire hydrant manufacturing plant. Several male Mueller employees solicited these female employees for sex, exposed their genitals and made sexual comments about the women’s bodies and sex lives. The incidents happened from about May of 2018 until late August 2020, according to the suit.

According to the EEOC, one Mueller employee attempted to rape one of the female janitors.

After the women complained to IH Services and Mueller managers, IH Services retaliated against two of them by reducing their hours, making them work overnight shifts, and suspending or terminating them, according to the suit.

Under a three-year consent decree, both companies will review and revise their sexual harassment and retaliation policies, post them in prominent locations or distribute them to all employees. Both companies will also provide annual training on sexual harassment and retaliation policies and employee rights to both managers and non-supervisory employees.

“Under Title VII, employers must provide a workplace free from severe or pervasive sexual harassment,” EEOC Birmingham District Director Bradley Anderson said. “Companies like Mueller do not get a free pass when its employees harass individuals who are employed by another company. Likewise, employers like IH Services are liable for sex harassment of their employees even when the harasser is not its employee.”