Commission on Human Rights
October 2005 Rulings on Discrimination Complaints

October rulings include probable cause determination and hearing date in American Legion case

COVINGTON – The Kentucky Commission on Human Rights (KCHR) today set a hearing date after making a probable cause determination in a case alleging race discrimination and involving the American Legion Post No. 62 in Franklin, Ky. This at the monthly meeting of the KCHR Board of Commissioners held in Covington. 

Following a probable cause determination, a hearing is held to determine whether there has been a violation of civil rights laws.  A determination of probable cause is not a final decision on the facts. A hearing in the matter of Johnson and Shadi v American Legion Post 62 is scheduled for January 26 and 27, 2006, in Franklin.

The complaint made by Kentucky Commission on Human Rights Commissioner Priscilla Johnson and Mr. Al Shadi alleges discrimination based on race (African American) in employment and in a public accommodation, a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, The Kentucky Civil Rights Act (344.040 and 344.120, respectively) and the Kentucky Revenue Code (141.010). 

Mr. Shadi, a contract employee through his company, alleged he was denied access to the Legion Post facility to service equipment because of a “whites only” policy. KCHR Commissioner Johnson filed a commissioner-initiated complaint arising from the same incident. The investigation by the KCHR revealed that Mr. Shadi’s white co-worker was told by a white representative of the American Legion facility that Mr. Shadi would not be able to go in because the American Legion Post 62 was “whites only.” The investigation also revealed that a white male on the premises overheard the exchange and said, “It’s their rules.” The American Legion denies any violation of the law.

In March 2005, the Kentucky Supreme Court issued a ruling that said discriminatory practices of private clubs can be investigated.  The decision in the case of the Commonwealth of Kentucky and Kentucky Commission on Human Rights v Pendennis Club Inc. et al. held that the Kentucky revenue code provisions are applicable to private clubs and can be used as an enforcement mechanism by denying tax deductions where clubs discriminate in their members.  The case further arguably prohibits interference with a complainant’s ability to enter the private club as an employee.  Finally, the Supreme Court decision provides a platform on which to decide whether the public accommodation provisions in the Kentucky Civil Rights Act are applicable in the event the Post is determined to be a private club.  The KCHR has not yet determined in this case if the American Legion Post 62 is a private club under the statute.

In other commission business, the Board of Commissioners today approved 4 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 2 complaints under reconsideration with findings of no probable cause. The commission accepted one complaint withdrawal with private settlement terms and three withdrawals for a right to sue.    

Angela Rainey v B & P Apartments Inc., in Winchester: The complaint alleged discrimination based on sex and retaliation in employment, a violation of the Kentucky Civil Rights Act (KRS 344.040 and KRS 344.280, respectively) and The U.S. Civil Rights Act Title VII. The complainant alleged she was subjected to repeated sexual advances in the workplace and that in retaliation for reporting the matter she was terminated by her employer. 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 and to compensate the complainant in the amount of $4,000. The respondent agreed to undergo sexual harassment training by the KCHR. The respondent agreed to post notices to employees about the right to equal employment opportunity.

KCHR Commissioner Richard Brown v. Accu-Tech 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). The complainant alleged the respondent recruited, procured or employed gender specific employees through a staffing agency.  The respondent denied any unlawful discrimination. The two parties agreed to conciliate the matter wherein the respondent agreed to comply with civil rights laws, enforce its policy prohibiting unlawful discrimination, undergo civil rights compliance training, and report to the commission with regard to compliance for one year.

KCHR Commissioner Richard Brown v. Grindmaster Corporation, 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). 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 attend civil rights compliance training.

KCHR Commissioner Richard Brown v. Great Northern Holding LLC, 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). 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 agrees to enforce its 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.

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, financial transactions, and private clubs. The Kentucky Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, familial status in housing, disability, age (40 or over) in employment, and 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.