Chili's Fires* Long-Time Employee After Sexual Harassment Claim [UPDATED]
When my sister, Rachel Spicuglia, a five-year employee of Chili's Restaurant (owned by Brinker International), reported to her manager the escalating sexual harassment she was receiving from the cooks, which had culminated in an assault that morning in the walk-in refrigerator, the manager asked Rachel if the offending employee had gotten a "full cup" when he had grabbed her breasts. Shocked that the manager would joke in such way, Rachel protested that it wasn't funny, but he insisted that it was actually information that he needed to know.
Rachel ended up taking a leave of absence, filing EEOC Charge of Discrimination on August 12, but she continued to work with Chili's to arrange transfer to another store. The transfer was approved, but Rachel's calls to the store manager were never returned, and on December 9, Rachel received a letter from her health insurance, saying that her medical benefits were denied, due to the fact that she was terminated from her job. Two weeks before Christmas, without any warning, and still waiting for the EEOC to review her complaint. Apparently, Chili's was unable to fire Rachel during her leave of absence, but under Georgia law, unlike other states, you can suffer sexual harassment and be fired.
Rachel is 28, a musician, and a hard-working server who has worked in restaurants since she was 16 years old. She has resisted the big money to be made in higher-end restaurants, or even by taking dinner shifts at Chili's, because working the Monday through Friday day shifts have allowed her to play music at night, and to spend nights and weekends with her family.
A model employee for Chili's, Rachel has won many store competitions, getting great customer feedback, and as she has traveled and performed in several states, she has worked in Chili's in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Arkansas, Nevada, and Georgia. In the two years that she has been at the Kennesaw, GA restaurant, she always ranked in the top 5 servers (out of about 60), and often ranked #1. Rachel loved her job and was not only a nice person to work with, but a reliable worker. She's also someone who has tried to avoid getting anyone in trouble, even when she tore a tendon in her ankle 2 years ago and her manager simply wrapped it in a bandage and put her back on the floor.
Rachel's coworkers enjoyed working with her, as she is friendly, a great listener, and a giver of hugs. The sexual harassment started ten months prior to her EOC filing, when a cook named Juan grabbed Rachel's butt when she gave him a hug. She told him not to touch her in that way, and never hugged him again. The harassment increased and became a running joke in the kitchen, where some of the cooks would coordinate with Juan, as he would follow Rachel into the walk-in, and one of them would turn the lights off. She had reported these incidents to her manager, Kathy, who laughed it off as a harmless prank, and did nothing to stop the harassment, which had included inappropriate touching and hands shoved down her pants.
In late spring 2008, after Rachel reported the assault to her manager Bowie, he spoke to Juan (unclear whether he was given an official company warning). While the sexual harassment stopped for a brief time, the cooks began causing trouble for her in the kitchen, refusing to make her food or give her the side dishes her customers had asked for. And two weeks later, she was assaulted again, a pattern that continued until a couple months later, when Rachel's general manager, Cindy, was managing. When Rachel reported the harassment to her, Cindy offered to write Juan up. Appalled at such a minor penalty, Rachel emphasized the level of abuse, and the fact that he had been previously warned. Cindy told Rachel that Juan didn't understand English - which was not only untrue (he does speak English) but seemed to be an excuse for behavior that Rachel had made clear was unacceptable. Rachel left work that day, and through a lawyer requested a leave of absence under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), subsequently filing a charge of discrimination.
However, Rachel's lawyer, Steve Mixon, notes: "You can't just sue. You have to go through the EEOC [Equal Employment Opportunity Commission], which can take a month, or multiple months to have an investigator assign to your case." Mixon noted that it is in the interests of the employer - in this case Brinker International - to procrastinate, as many witnesses who might be willing to come forward are transient due to typical staff turnover in the service industry.
This is a direct result of the slashing of EEOC budget under the Bush Administration, which lacks the funds and staff it needs to protect women like Rachel. It has not only been under a hiring freeze since 2001, it has dramatically cut staff, most of them in enforcement. There are a mere 5 investigators covering the entire state of Georgia, as well as large portions of South Carolina. Needless to say there is a backlog of thousands of cases. Potential new cases are put off by the difficulty of filing, and often they are told to return or call back at a later time, because there is no one to do the intake.
As a Georgia resident, Rachel is fortunate that she is even eligible to file. While sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, under Title VII, employees working for small businesses vulnerable in states like Georgia that have no state law to cover the gaps. "It's a systemic problem," said Mixon. "In Georgia, we do not have much enforcement in the area of sex harassment. My understanding is that in California and other states, most lawyers there don't use federal law because they are so ineffective. They use state laws instead."
Since Rachel filed her claim and took her leave of absence, the economy has gone south. She never wanted to lose her job with Chili's. Unfortunately, the corporation chose to penalize a five-year employee who prided herself in her work, in a vulnerable economic time, and without any warning. Rachel had just written a large check for medical expenses, that she now has to wait for a refund for, even as she needs to secure alternate, more expensive, heath coverage elsewhere. It's Happy Holidays from Chili's Restaurant!
*Update: Since this post was published Tuesday morning, Brinker International has contacted Rachel's lawyer, informing him that Rachel's termination was a computer error. Rachel has since been reinstated with Chili's. Check back for further updates.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
*Yeesh* what a mess.
First off, the root culprit here is the manager and her relations to the back of house staff. I would guess that the manager has little or no control over the cooks or dishwashers. Probably only 2 or 3 admit to understanding English, and these are the de-facto representatives of the back house labor force. I would also speculate that the manager cannot or will not stand up to these employees, fearing retribution, sabotage or having the entire crew walk out on a busy Saturday. Undertrained, understaffed, and probably under supported she chose the path of least resistance and got rid of Rachael. Corporate just was doing what they are paid to do -- limit the financial impact of EEOC claims. No malice here, just bad management and no oversight.
In general, boycotts are pointless. Let's figure that, on average, all of us incensed readers go to Chili's four times a year. Also assume that oh, say, 3,000 of us actually boycott. That's 12,000 meals not eaten at Chili's. Figure the average tab of $50 for two people and that works out to $600,000. Heck, let's mark it up by a factor of 10! A 6 million dollar loss on revenues of 4,000,000,000 (yes billion with a 'b') is less .15%. A fluctuation in the price of tomatoes will have a larger effect on the corporate bottom line. AND, I would really miss my chili-queso dip.
It would be hard for me to boycott Chili's, seeing as I only ate there once in my life 15 years ago.
Georgia is a Republican state. Don't think for one minute that it doesn't matter. The whole tenor of EEOC in this state seems to be to to blame the person filing the complaint, no matter how much proof there is to substantiate the complaint. The judges are mostly republican also. These people are very friendly towards big businesses. It is really hard for the common person's voice to be heard, never mind justice to be served. I speak from experience.
I really wish Rachel well and support her in her efforts.
Never eaten there and never will now. A Chili's near me recently closed and I felt a sadness for the employees but not Chili's only because it was just another crappy chain restaurant that has driven away good quality family owned restaurants.
I spent 15 years in the restaurant business (dishwasher to GM 20 years ago) and sexual harassment was rampant. I remember being in a managers meeting and the GM said "make sure that when you hire a hostess that you are horny" and the reason he said that was because sex sells. We had the best looking hostesses and hosts and we were very busy but the food wasn't bad either.
The answer to all this is shop local, buy local, eat local. Screw the national chains (such as Kentucky Fried Cruelty, Chili's) and "big box" stores like Wal-Mart and Home Depot. Think local. There are plenty of independents left. Please support them!
Yeah - like the independents are any better!
My experience is that independents are usually better than chain restaurants, seeing they prepare food to order rather than cooking it in the morning and packing it in plastic bags that are reheated in the microwave (can you say "plasticizers"?) or purchased fully pre-prepared. But it is also my experience that most people will not consider eating at an independent restaurant, buying coffee at an independent cofffeeshop, etc. It's like the only thing that matters is whether the restaurant has gone through the national marketing machine. Eating at a locally-owned restaurant where they don't have photos of the food on the menu? Just too scary.
this is why we should remove regulations such as title VII. As the article shows this woman was restrained from filing the lawsuit right off because the EEOC wanted her the jump through some hoops first. Do away with the EEOC and the victims don't have hoops to jump through.
I agree with many of the other posters on this page in that after the first incident was ignored by management I would not have bothered with trying to handle this internally anymore and would have called the police.
God knows that no woman has EVER cried "sexual harassment" without a shred of verifiable evidence or eyewitnesses.
Gee...here in Chicago, Brian Urlacher's insane baby-mama was just arrested for failing to pay any of the $11 MILLION she owes Michael Flatley for the false allegations she made against Michael Flatley.
The situation here probably did happen...a
The only criminal behavior I see is Chili's felonially overpriced, weak margaritas and overseasoned, cold fries.
you raise a good point in that there are surely some false accusations and litigation. I believe the solution would be a loser pays court system. That is whichever side loses the case pays all court fees and attorney fees. This would reduce frivolous lawsuits that are seeking a settlement because there would be less incentive to settle. This would also work to Rachel's benefit in this case because even if the parent company tried to delay the process if her case had merit then she would still win in the end.
For the sake of arguement I am inclined to take the writer at her word. This is not a court of law and we will not be on the jury so I'm not going to require such a heavy burden of proof.
Huh? The problem is lack of support for the process of getting complaints handled and your solution is to remove the process entirely?
Great...no federal process...
litigation which in this current example has been the most promising avenue.
I knew a lot of women who told me, and was harassed myself, at a $32 billion company (at the tme) which HR did nothing. In fact, one women told me the HR manager made unwanted advances to her when she filed a complaint against other sexual harassment. Justice in the US is politically taboo in many cases except when it comes to victimless 'crimes'.
From the description of the incident, there was an escalation from the initial inappropriate butt-grab (which may have been overlooked as a misunderstanding of intent or a cultural disconnect), to verbal abuse and inappropriate teasing. That became sabotaging her work, and finally a physical attack. What would have been next? Rape?
Women and girls benefit in many ways by learning and practicing personal safety and physical self-defense techniques. Two quality programs teaching them, practicing on real men in padded suits, are IMPACT, and R.A.D. Both are available in many metropolitan areas across the nation.
Equally valuable is learning to spot precursors to violence and patterns of behavior in others indicating a propensity for violence and abuse, whether it be in a significant other, or in the workplace. The works of Gavin DeBecker are well-worth reading.
Actually, she hugged him first. After that it went too far.
1) Remind me to never eat at a Chili's again. Oh, that's right. I never eat at chain restaurants, anyhow, since I live in a region where every other block of most any village or city offers some of the best food in the world.
2) The incident described sounds less like fun and games and more like an assault. A police matter. My favorite correct response to having one's breast grabbed by a co-worker is a loud, "NO", a quick heel jab to the assailant's nose, resuming the defensive posture while having someone call 911 and backing to safety, even if that means leaving the premises for the nearest police station.
3) Worker safety is the prime issue here. If the corporation and manager failed to provide a reasonable degree of workplace safety, or even condoned workplace violence, he/she could be held criminally negligent for any damages resulting from the attack, including psychological damage to the victim.
"The incident described sounds less like fun and games and more like an assault. A police matter. "
Exactly! File a criminal complaint, and worry about the civil suit later. Make the police due their job, and investigate these incidents.
You know what? I went to Chili's and expected to get Mexican food. You know what I got? Rice cakes and ketchup. I felt like a schnook!
well, in solidarity, chili's has lost my business
and I loved their southwestern eggrolls
but Rebekah, you need to also look at University of California
whose employees are not allowed due process if they become whistleblowers
please look at the stories posted here:
http://clo
this is the largest University system in the world and yet
workers are treated like this
so it is no surprise that a franchise in Georgia is getting away with all of this
I don't believe these people should be left out of your thoughts as you're thinking about what's happened to this woman. The people on the following list were enablers.
Douglas H. Brooks----
Todd E. Diener----
David M. Orenstein-
Wyman Roberts---
Greg Walther---
Charles M. Sonsteby--
Roger F. Thomson---
Michael B. Webberman-
Valerie L. Davisson--
Thank you Chili's for giving me a good reason not to patronise any establishment owned by Brinker International. Those include: Chili's, On the Border Mexican Grill and Cantina, Maggiano's Little Italy and Romano's Macaroni Grill.
I will be sending this information to everyone I know.
If you condone this kind of treatment of women, try doing without our purchasing power!
Huffpo bloggers please pass this info along.
Thank you
Wow, they really edit the comments around here. It seems like calling for violence on fry cooks, and diagnosing the general population as morons is frowned upon.
Who'd a thunk it?
Okay, I think we should all join hands and sing a song of peace to Juan and celebrate the widespread wisdom and intelligence of our general population. I certainly do not think that Juan has a beating coming to him, because that would be wrong.
Seriously I would boycott Chili's over this if it had ever occured to me to set foot in the place. Sounds like someone needs to move the %$#%^#@ out of Georgia.
It's awesome she has a sister who can blog about it and raise the general awareness and all. If I were her brother, I'd handle it a little bit more personally though.
I'm appalled by how Chili's has handled this situation. I won't be eating there again.
The food there isn't very good, anyway.
I'd say that I'm surprised, but unfortunately, I've witnessed and been the subject to that kind of behaviour for years. A girlfriend of mine worked for a similar chain restaurant in SF and ended up fired as well. She sued and won a judgment, she was however, out of work for months. She quickly found out who supported her lawsuit and who didn't.
What really gets me, is that in both cases, A WOMAN manager stood by and did nothing. What's going on here? Our country, states, cities, towns, etc... are run by 'a good 'old boy's club'. If you can't get other women to stand up for and with you, how are we expected to receive (and demand) 'fair and equal' treatment? Honestly, I expect more out of women than men. They know how rocky the 'work road' is.
Good luck with your sister's lawsuit. For once, I'd like to see the 'good' person win in the end.
I'm glad everyone is so open minded on this...I'm sure we're getting the entire story & every detail just the way it went down.
It's disgusting how everyone is daming Chili's based on the one-sided account of a biased family member who's abusing her position as a member of the media.
Maybe it happened like this....it probably did...but maybe, just MAYBE, there's another side to this and/or this is unprovable.
There's another side to sexual harassment/sexual assault?? Cause that's what this is, plain and simple! I can agree with you that sometimes there is another side to a sexual harassment claim, mostly when a woman overhears something meant for someone else and complains.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
