Catherine Eschbach, acting general counsel for the EEOC
LOS ANGELES — A federal agency has filed a lawsuit against Buena Park-based 99 Ranch Market, alleging that the supermarket chain has illegally discriminated against non-Chinese employees through firings, wage policies and fewer work opportunities.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed its complaint on June 30 in the Central District of California. The lawsuit argues that 99 Ranch Market and parent company Tawa Supermarket Inc. violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by subjecting a class of non-Chinese employees to “discriminatory termination, constructive discharge, different terms and conditions, and/or discriminatory failure to promote on the basis of national origin.”
The complaint says the company’s conduct began in 2016 when Tawa, under new leadership, forced its vice president of human resources to resign and terminated non-Chinese district managers who had received satisfactory work evaluations. Two non-Chinese store managers were also terminated, according to the lawsuit.
The company, which is family-owned and was founded by a Taiwanese immigrant, Roger Chen, operates at least 66 markets in multiple states, including California, Nevada, Texas, New York, New Jersey and Virginia.
The lawsuit mentions no aggrieved party by name, but alleges that non-Chinese employees were harassed and terminated and that the company’s workplace policies were inconsistent. The company did not require Chinese workers to speak English on the job or wear gloves, according to the complaint, which added that 99 Ranch Market reduced non-Chinese employees’ work opportunities to part-time while others were allowed to work full-time.
The lawsuit urges the court to permanently enjoin the company and its management from engaging in employment practices that violate Title VII. It also seeks compensation for aggrieved parties, including back pay with interest, and compensation for emotional pain, suffering, mental anguish, humiliation and loss of enjoyment of life.
In addition, the EEOC is asking the court for punitive damages as a result of the company’s “malicious or reckless” actions.
Tawa did not respond to requests for comment about the allegations from The Record, but the company told the Rebel Yellow Newsletter that it disagrees with the charges and does not tolerate employment discrimination of any kind.
“We believe the claims brought by the EEOC are without merit and will defend the case through the appropriate legal process," the company was quoted saying in the published report.
The EEOC reported that it filed the lawsuit after initially trying to reach a legal settlement through voluntary means.
“The EEOC will not hesitate to bring litigation to make clear to employers that cultural preference regarding the composition of their workforce does not insulate them from liability,” Catherine Eschbach, acting general counsel for the EEOC, said in a prepared statement. “Preferences based on protected characteristics are simply a form of illegal discrimination under Title VII. That the employer here is a Chinese supermarket chain does not provide license to terminate non-Chinese managers or otherwise discriminate against non-Chinese workers in employment terms and conditions.”
The EEOC has also suggested that the alleged discriminatory actions may have been due to perceived customer preferences or the idea that employees from certain ethnic groups are more productive than others.
