NEW ORLEANS – The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has filed a lawsuit in federal court ordering a company that specializes in industrial water and process management to correct its “unlawful employment practices.”
The EEOC, a federal agency that enforces laws prohibiting workplace discrimination, filed its complaint June 30 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
The named defendants are Ecolab Inc. and Nalco Company LLC, a subsidiary of Ecolab. Ecolab is headquartered in Saint Paul, Minn., while Nalco is headquartered in Naperville, Ill. Both do business in Garyville, La., according to the EEOC complaint.
“The defendants, Nalco Company, LLC, and Ecolab, Inc., discriminated against Ms. Goehring under the ADEA when they conditioned her employment on her submission to an EKG because she was 40 years of age or older, and violated the ADA because the EKG was not administered to all employees in the same entering class of jobs, as required for post-offer, pre-employment medical examinations,” according to the EEOC’s 12-page complaint.
Ecolab develops and offers services, technology, and systems that specialize in treatment, purification, cleaning, and hygiene of water in a wide variety of applications. Nalco is an American supplier of water, energy, and air improvement products and services for industrial and institutional markets, owned by Ecolab.
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, or ADEA, forbids employment discrimination against anyone at least 40 years old or older in the U.S. The Americans with Disabilities Act, or ADA, is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on disability in various areas of life, including employment and transportation.
The EEOC claims the companies violated the ADA by disclosing confidential medical information obtained during its post-offer medical examination and by excluding Trina Goehring from employment based on disability, by requiring that she be free of any restrictions.
In January 2022, Goehring was offered a logistics specialist position after applying and being interviewed.
According to the commission’s complaint, she had the “necessary skills, experience and qualifications” for the position.
However, the companies said their offer was contingent upon the “successful completion and satisfactory results” of specific post-offer screenings, including a medical examination through Corporate Health Resources Inc., which Ecolab and Nalco contracted with.
During her January 2022 exam, the companies, through CHR, required Goehring to take an electrocardiogram, or EKG, due to her age. She would be ineligible for employment without it.
Doing so, the EEOC alleges, violated the ADEA by discriminating against Goehring for her age and violated the ADA because the EKG was not required by all entering employees, regardless of disability.
Also during her medical exam, Goehring was instructed to complete a form asking her to disclose any current medications. In response, she disclosed she was on Lamotrigine, a prescription medication used to treat bipolar disorder in adults.
“As such, Defendants’ post-conditional-offer medical examination and inquiries called for and led to her disclosure of her condition of Bipolar Depression,” the EEOC complaint states, noting that bipolar depression is an impairment within the meaning of the ADA.
Following the disclosure, the companies suspended the hiring process, the commission claims.
“Defendants took one or more adverse actions against Ms. Goehring because of her impairment,” the complaint states. “Defendants perceived Ms. Goehring’s Bipolar Depression as an impairment.
“Given that Defendants took adverse employment actions against Ms. Goehring because of her real or perceived impairment, she was regarded by Defendants as a person with a disability.”
The commission contends Goehring could perform the “essential functions” of the position with or without reasonable accommodation.
After informing the companies she was not comfortable with CHR’s medical examination process – and asking what would happen if she did not receive final clearance from CHR – the EEOC claims Goehring was told the companies might deem her “not fit for duty” and her offer would be rescinded.
Soon after, in February 2022, she requested to withdraw her application, the commission alleges.
“Ms. Goehring withdrew from consideration because Defendants had already constructively discharged her, refused to hire her, and/or withdrawn her conditional offer of employment,” the complaint states.
However, her prospective supervisor later called her to ask what kind of “accommodations” he could make so she could proceed.
“Ms. Goehring, who had not wanted to disclose her Bipolar Depression to her prospective employer, was extremely distressed by this call,” the EECO’s complaint states. “The prospective supervisor’s knowledge of Ms. Goehring’s medical conditions and related matters revealed that Defendants had not properly maintained the confidentiality of medical information, as required by the ADA.”
Soon after, the companies sent Goehring a letter stating they decided to consider other candidates, officially rescinding her job offer.
Goehring eventually filed a discrimination charge with the EEOC. In April 2024, the commission issued Ecolab and Nalco a letter asking them to eliminate the “unlawful employment practices” and provide relief.
After months of not being able to secure an agreement, the EEOC issued a notice of conciliation failure in June 2024.
According to the complaint, the EEOC seeks a permanent injunction enjoining the companies from discriminating against applicants and employees on the basis of age and disability.
The commission also seeks back pay, prejudgment interest, possible reinstatement and/or front pay, punitive damages, and liquidated damages.
EEOC Acting General Counsel Andrew Rogers and Deputy General Counsel Christopher Lage are among those representing the commission.
