Surname 1

To: AB Pneumatics, INC.

From: James Blocker, Counsel

Subject: Lawsuit for Gender Discrimination against AB Pneumatics, INC.

Date: 4/1/24

Diversity and Discrimination

Issue

According to the information provided, it is clear that there is a case of AB Pneumatics

manufacturing factory having a gender bias against its female employees. The company only has

one toilet for male workers and denies women in the factory fair access to washroom facilities

during working hours. Gender bias substantially happens when ten women at the plant leave

their workstations across the parking lot for separate administrative offices to use toilets on

breaks. This policy unfairly burdens women employees, unlike their male counterparts. Women

workers at plants are not even allowed fundamental rights to enter restrooms due to their gender.

Rule

The Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 is significant legislation that prohibits employment

discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin (Shannon and Hunter).

Indeed, denying equal access to workplace facilities such as toilets on grounds of gender does

violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. While the law permits segregated toilets between men

and women, they must be placed relatively close to each other in quantity and ease of

accessibility.

Analysis
 Surname 2

Having only a single male toilet in the manufacturing facility where the majority of

employees work while females are directed towards separate administrative buildings constitutes

gender imbalance and disadvantage among female employees. The recent construction of this

new manufacturing facility with a male restroom by AB Pneumatics only represents an

intentional numberless hindrance against females. Among other things, it would be doubtful if no

female bathroom was included in a new building, given the numerous women employed there.

By requiring them to leave the production area and cross through parking spaces just to use

lavatories during break time, whereas this does not happen for male colleagues, AB Pneumatics

aggravates restrictions and humiliations among females. This inconveniences ladies regarding

the distance covered but also exposes them to potential security and safety risks when they are

required by circumstances to cross these grounds unaccompanied, especially at timetabled

intervals.

EEOC should file a complaint against AB Pneumatics for what appears to be a violation

of Title VII’s prohibition on gender discrimination in terms and conditions of employment

(Arike). For example, EEOC can seek an injunction requiring that the company provide equal

access to bathroom facilities for female workers at the manufacturing plant as male employees

receive. It may be appropriate to award monetary damages to female plaintiffs affected by this

discriminatory policy to compensate them for invading their rights.

The EEOC is well positioned to bring a gender discrimination lawsuit against AB

Pneumatic over its discriminatory restroom practices, as it is the agency charged with enforcing

federal employment discrimination laws. Allowing this kind of unfair, unlawful act to go

unnoticed will defeat the very purpose of legislation like Title VII, which is meant to prevent

discrimination (Ceballos et al.). By taking legal action, these infringements can stop, and people
 Surname 3

who have suffered from such abuses can get justice while at the same time reducing cases of

workplace gender-based violence since it will send out a message telling everyone that such

types of activities are not allowed in work-related areas (Boucher).

Conclusion

In summary, the signs indicate that AB Pneumatics’ conduct was a clear-cut case of

gender bias against the women who worked in the plant by not offering them equitable restroom

access. This violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and calls for legal action by the EEOC.

Filing a lawsuit enables EEOC to enforce anti-discrimination laws, address this illegal workplace

policy, and discourage other firms from having similar discriminatory acts that lead to an unfair

environment based on gender. The EEOC has an excellent legal basis for asking for injunctive

relief and monetary penalties regarding such an intolerable violation.

 Surname 4

Works Cited

Arike, Folami Zainab. "Employment Discrimination: A Comparative and Critical Review Of The

Law In Nigeria." (2021).

Boucher, Anna. "‘What is exploitation and workplace abuse?’A classification schema to

understand exploitative workplace behavior towards migrant workers." New Political

Economy 27.4 (2022): 629-645.

Ceballos, Cristina Isabel, David Freeman Engstrom, and Daniel E. Ho. "Disparate Limbo: How

Administrative Law Erased Antidiscrimination." Yale LJ 131 (2021): 370.

Shannon, John H., and Richard J. Hunter Jr. "The Civil Rights Act of 1964: Beyond Race to

Employment Discrimination Based on Sex: The Three Letter Word'That Has Continued

to Vex Society and The United States Supreme Court." Journal of Social and Political

Sciences 3.3 (2020).