- Home
- About
- Practice Areas
- Areas Served
- Resources
- Contact us
You report sexual harassment to your manager or HR. They say they’ll look into it. Weeks go by. Nothing changes. The harassment continues. Then your schedule gets worse. You get written up for things that never mattered before. Eventually, you feel like you have no choice but to quit.
If that sounds familiar, you’re not alone. And a federal case that just settled for $1.49 million shows exactly why employers can’t get away with it.
On March 27, 2026, a federal judge approved a consent decree requiring Justin Vineyards & Winery LLC and its parent company, The Wonderful Company LLC, to pay $1.49 million and implement workplace reforms to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit brought by the EEOC.
The case, EEOC v. Justin Vineyards & Winery LLC, et al. (Case No. 2:22-cv-06039, C.D. Cal.), alleged that since at least August 2017, the companies allowed a pattern of sexual harassment against female employees by male supervisors, coworkers, and even customers. The EEOC filed suit in 2022 after conciliation efforts failed.
According to the lawsuit, the harassment included:
The companies knew about the problem, or should have. When women reported the harassment, their complaints were not properly investigated. Instead, the women who spoke up were subjected to retaliation: double shifts, fabricated accusations of wrongdoing, and verbal abuse from supervisors. Some were effectively forced out of their jobs.
The consent decree requires both companies to halt harassment and retaliation, undergo compliance audits, and implement additional measures at the vineyard operations.
Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employers have a legal obligation to provide a workplace free from sexual harassment. This means two things:
Employers need anti-harassment policies, training, and a reporting system that actually works.
Once an employer knows or should know about harassment, they must take prompt and effective corrective action. “We’ll look into it,” followed by nothing, is not corrective action.
When an employer fails to address known harassment, the company itself becomes liable for the hostile work environment. And when an employer punishes employees for reporting harassment, that retaliation is a separate violation of Title VII.
This case is a textbook example of both failures. The employer knew. The employer didn’t fix it. The employer punished the people who reported it.
The Justin Vineyards case reinforces several important principles that apply no matter where you work:
Many employees think they don’t have a case because the harassment was committed by a coworker, not a boss. But if you reported it and your employer failed to act, the company is on the hook.
If your work conditions changed for the worse after you complained (schedule changes, bad reviews, increased scrutiny, demotion, termination), that’s potential retaliation. Courts take retaliation claims seriously, and the EEOC actively pursues them.
Several of the women in this case were “forced to quit,” a concept the law calls constructive discharge. If your employer makes working conditions so intolerable that a reasonable person would feel they had no choice but to resign, that can be treated the same as a firing.
The EEOC has identified sexual harassment in the restaurant and food service industries as “a widespread problem.” If you work in these industries and you’re experiencing harassment, you are not alone, and the federal government is paying attention.
Save text messages, emails, and any written communications. Write down what happened, when, and who witnessed it. Do this as close to the event as possible.
An email or written complaint to HR creates a paper trail. Verbal reports are harder to prove later.
If your schedule, assignments, reviews, or treatment change after you make a complaint, document that too. This is evidence of retaliation.
Many employees wait too long because they think the situation will improve on its own. It usually doesn’t.
If you are experiencing sexual harassment or retaliation at work, timing matters:
You have 300 days from the last act of harassment or retaliation to file a charge with the EEOC in deferral states like Minnesota and Illinois.
You have 1 year from the discriminatory act to file with the Minnesota Department of Human Rights.
You have 2 years from the discriminatory act to file with the Illinois Department of Human Rights.
For ongoing harassment, the clock typically runs from the most recent incident. But don’t assume you have plenty of time. Consult an attorney to understand which deadlines apply to your situation.
Having a policy on paper is not enough. If your employer has a policy but fails to enforce it, fails to investigate complaints, or retaliates against people who use the complaint process, the policy actually works against the employer. It shows they knew what they were supposed to do and chose not to do it.
Under federal law (Title VII), you typically sue the employer, not the individual harasser. However, some state laws allow claims against individual supervisors. In Minnesota and Illinois, the employer is generally the proper defendant, but an attorney can evaluate whether individual liability applies in your case.
You may still have a claim, especially if your employer knew or should have known about the harassment through other means (for example, if the harassment was open and obvious, or if other employees reported it). That said, reporting strengthens your case significantly. If you haven’t reported yet, consider doing so in writing now.
If you reported harassment and your employer did nothing, or if speaking up made things worse, you have legal options. Contact Wanta Thome Employment Lawyers for a free, confidential consultation. We represent employees facing sexual harassment and retaliation in Minnesota and Illinois.