Commission on Human Rights
December 2005 Rulings on Discrimination Complaints

December 14, 2005
      
 
December Rulings of the Kentucky Commission on Human Rights

LOUISVILLE – The Kentucky Commission on Human Rights (KCHR) Board of Commissioners today approved six conciliation agreements. Conciliation agreements are reached through KCHR negotiations between complainants and respondents in consideration for the full and complete resolution of claims of alleged discrimination. The commission dismissed 17 discrimination complaints, which, after investigation, resulted in findings of no probable cause. The commission dismissed one complaint under reconsideration with a finding of no probable cause. The commission accepted four complaint withdrawals with private settlement terms and three withdrawals for a right to sue.    

Mary Ferrell v. Latisha Floyd d/b/a Plum Tree Apartments and Somer-West Inc., in Somerset: The complaint alleged discrimination based on disability in housing, a violation of the Kentucky Civil Rights Act (KRS 344.360) and The U.S. Civil Rights Act Title VII. The complainant alleged she was denied a handicap parking space at her residence to accommodate her disability. The respondent denied the allegation, asserting the apartment complex has three parking spaces for people with disabilities, at this property with 24 units. The commission made a determination of probable cause, and the two parties agreed to conciliate the matter. The respondent agreed to comply with civil rights laws, undergo Fair Housing training, post Fair Housing notices on its property and distribute Fair Housing literature to residents and potential renters. 

KCHR Commissioner Richard Brown v. General Shale Products, in Louisville: The complaint alleged discrimination based on sex in employment, a violation of the Kentucky Civil Rights Act (KRS 344.020 and KRS 344.040) and The U.S. Civil Rights Act. The complainant alleged the respondent has recruited, procured or employed gender specific employees through a staffing agency. The respondent denied all allegations. The two parties agreed to conciliate the matter, and the respondent affirms that its employment practices do and shall comply with the Kentucky Civil Rights Act. The respondent agreed to adopt a policy prohibiting discrimination to disseminate to employees. The respondent will report for one year to the commission and undergo civil rights compliance training.

KCHR Commissioner Richard Brown v. Haverty’s Furniture Company Inc., in Louisville: The complaint alleged discrimination based on sex in employment, a violation of the Kentucky Civil Rights Act (KRS 344.020 and KRS 344.040) and The U.S. Civil Rights Act. The complainant alleged the respondent has recruited, procured or employed gender specific employees through a staffing agency. The respondent denied all allegations. The two parties agreed to conciliate the matter, and the respondent affirms that its employment practices do and shall comply with the Kentucky Civil Rights Act. The respondent agreed to adopt a policy prohibiting discrimination and to disseminate it to employees. The respondent will report for one year to the commission and attend civil rights compliance training.

KCHR Commissioner Richard Brown v. Neff Packaging Solutions, in Louisville: The complaint alleged discrimination based on sex in employment, a violation of the Kentucky Civil Rights Act (KRS 344.020 and KRS 344.040) and The U.S. Civil Rights Act. The complainant alleged the respondent has recruited, procured or employed gender specific employees through a staffing agency. The respondent denied all allegations. The two parties agreed to conciliate the matter, and the respondent affirms that its employment practices do and shall comply with the Kentucky Civil Rights Act. The respondent agreed to adopt a policy prohibiting discrimination and to disseminate it to employees.

Melissa May v. Shoney’s Ewers Family Restaurants Inc., in Morehead: The complaint alleged discrimination based on disability in employment, a violation of the Kentucky Civil Rights Act (KRS 344.040) and The American Disabilities Act of 1990. The complainant alleged she was terminated from employment after her employer learned she had a disability and that her work performance was satisfactory to her knowledge. The respondent denied the allegations. The parties agreed to conciliation the matter. The respondent agreed to compensate the complainant in the amount of $15,000, undergo civil rights compliance training, and post Equal Employment Opportunity notices at its property in a prominent place.

Oriselma Mendez v. Rio Grande Restaurant Corporation, in Florence: The complaint alleged discrimination based on religion and sex in employment, violations of the Kentucky Civil Rights Act and The U.S. Civil Rights Act. The complainant alleged she was subjected to a hostile work environment based on her sex, female, and her religion, Jehovah Witness. The respondent denied all allegations and asserted the complainant was not on its payroll for failure to complete an employment application. The two parties agreed to conciliate the matter. The respondent agreed to compensate the complainant in the amount of $5,000, comply with civil rights laws, undergo civil rights compliance training, and report to the commission for three years with regard to compliance.

The KCHR is the state government agency that enforces The Kentucky Civil Rights Act and the policies of federal civil rights laws.  It receives initiates, investigates, conciliates and rules upon jurisdictional complaints.  The KCHR has jurisdiction in housing, employment, public accommodations, and financial transactions. The Kentucky Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination in public accommodations, employment, housing, and financial transactions on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, disability, and sex. Discrimination is further prohibited on the basis of familial status in housing, the basis of age (40 or over) in employment, and the basis of a person’s tobacco-smoking status in employment.  Complaints not dismissed, settled or conciliated go to administrative hearing where commission decisions have the authority of a court of law.