By Ashley Fletcher Frampton
aframpton@scbiznews.com
Published Aug. 10, 2009

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has filed a lawsuit alleging sexual harassment against North Charleston-based Alternative Staffing Inc. and a North Carolina construction company.

The lawsuit, filed Aug. 6, says the companies subjected three women, and possibly others, to a sexually hostile work environment. The three women were employees of Alternative Staffing Inc. and were assigned in 2006 to work at an Orangeburg job site for the Raleigh-based construction firm Clancy & Theys.

The lawsuit says the women were harassed verbally and physically, a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The alleged harassment came from a Clancy & Theys labor foreman who was supervising the women and by employees of a third-party contrac­tor working at the site.

The women complained about the sexual harassment to Alternative Staffing’s office manager and asked to be transferred to another work site, but their request was denied, according to the lawsuit. The women also complained to Clancy & Theys’ foreman.

The lawsuit said the harassment continued after the complaints, and eventually the women were forced to resign.

Craig Lake, president of Alternative Staffing, said Monday morning he had not yet seen the lawsuit and couldn’t comment at this point.

Mark Jones, director of business development for Clancy & Theys’ Charlotte division, said the same on Tuesday.

Employment discrimination charges must be investigated by the EEOC before employees can take their complaints to court. Typically, the EEOC will determine whether there is reasonable evidence for the claim. But no matter what the finding, the employee can proceed to court after the EEOC rules.

In relatively few cases, the EEOC will take on a case and sue on the employee’s behalf.

Lynette Barnes, regional attorney for the EEOC Charlotte district office, said her office takes on about 30 cases a year. The district covers Washington, D.C., Virginia, North Carolina and most of South Carolina.

Barnes said she could not discuss the reasons the office chose to take up this particular case. But, in general, the office would consider cases if there are likely victims of discrimination other than those bringing the charge; if the case has the potential to set a significant precedent; or if it involves a company about which the EEOC has multiple concerns.

Geography might also be a reason, Barnes said. If the EEOC hasn’t taken on a case in a particular region in several years, it might choose a case there to raise awareness of federal laws.

Or the EEOC might take on a case because it is particularly egregious, she said.

“If nothing else, we want to let employers know that the government cares about this, and if you aren’t going to do something about it, we will,” Barnes said.

In a news release about the lawsuit, Barnes said, “This case is a reminder to employers that they must provide a harassment-free environment for their employees, regardless of who the perpetrators of the harassment are. Third parties can create a sexually hostile work environment for a company’s employees, and that is just as illegal.”

The EEOC has requested a jury trial. It is seeking damages for the three women and any others found to have been harassed. The EEOC is also asking the court to require the two companies to eliminate unlawful employment practices.