By Ty Hyderally Esq., Francine Foner Esq., and Kenny Delgado
November 22, 2024

What happens if an employer, in the name of appeasing a customer, uses race when determining job assignments? Can the preference of the customer protect the employer from being found guilty of discrimination?

The answer is a resounding NO!

In 2023, the EEOC filed a complaint against Acare HHC, doing business as Four Seasons Licensed Home Health Care (“Four Seasons”), alleging that Four Seasons was discriminating against its employees by removing and reassigning home health aides (“HHAs”) based on the racial preferences of its customers (EEOC v. ACARE HHC d/b/a Four Seasons Licensed Home Health Care, (23-cv-5760)). The EEOC sued in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York after failing to reach a pre-litigation settlement. The case proceeded with claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000(e), et seq. (“Title VII”), which prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of race or national origin.

In its complaint, the EEOC alleged that preferences of a client of an HHA based on race and/or national origin are an improper basis to assign employees to clients because it violates the protections provided by Title VII. The EEOC claimed that such practices run afoul of Title VII by engaging in a pattern or practice of terminating Black and Hispanic HHAs’ assignments to accommodate the preferences of clients or clients’ families. The EEOC further alleged that Four Seasons failed to establish and enforce policies that protect employees from assignments made on the basis of race and national origin. This failure stemmed from Four Seasons’ lack of training for coordinators, who were not informed that assigning or reassigning HHAs based on a client’s request constitutes unlawful discrimination. Additionally, the EEOC claimed that Four Seasons’ failure to inform clients that they could not request or exclude HHAs based on race or national origin resulted in hundreds of clients making such requests.

On September 24, 2024, the EEOC announced a settlement of the case, which included both monetary and equitable relief. As part of the settlement, in addition to a payment of $400,000, Four Seasons agreed to measures designed to prevent future discrimination. These measures included an injunction prohibiting Four Seasons from making home health aide assignments based on clients’ race- and/or national origin-based preferences, updates to Four Seasons’ internal policies, mandatory training for management employees about Title VII, and reporting of complaints. EEOC Regional Attorney Kimberly A. Cruz stated, “It is imperative for employers to have policies, training, and other safeguards in place that help prevent a client’s prejudices from influencing their employment decisions.”

Hopefully, the EEOC’s action against Four Seasons will encourage other employers in the home health aide industry to ensure that they do not assign employees based on race or national origin and to proactively educate staff and clients that requesting an aide based on race or national origin constitutes unlawful discrimination.

If you believe that you have been subject to unlawful discrimination, seek out an experienced employment attorney for assistance with protecting your rights.

En nuestra firma hablamos español. This blog is for informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and may not reasonably be relied upon as such. If you face a legal issue, you should consult a qualified attorney for independent legal advice regarding your particular set of facts. This blog may constitute attorney advertising. This blog is not intended to communicate with anyone in a state or other jurisdiction where such a blog may fail to comply with all laws and ethical rules of that state or jurisdiction.