• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

HRMorning

  • FREE RESOURCES
  • PREMIUM CONTENT
  • HR DEEP DIVES
  • PODCASTS
    • VOICES OF HR
    • WOMEN’S LEADERSHIP TODAY
  • LOGIN
  • GET STARTED
  • Employment Law
  • Benefits
  • Recruiting
  • HR Technology
  • Payroll
  • Management
  • Women’s Leadership
  • More
    • Talent Management
    • Performance Management
    • Leadership & Strategy
    • Compensation
    • Policy & Procedures
    • Wellness
    • Staff Departure
    • HR Career & Self-Care
    • Health Care
    • Retirement Plans
  • Employment Law

Gender stereotypes: Here’s what a $1.25M hiring mistake looks like

Carol Warner
By: Carol Warner
Read it on Beacon
  • Share on

About the Author

For nearly two decades, Carol Warner has analyzed the legal and financial realities behind workplace decisions, covering employment law, benefits, payroll and HR technology. She translates complex legal updates, regulatory shifts and vendor claims into plain language that HR teams can act on. Her focus is simple: What does this mean for employers, and what should they do next? Connect with her on LinkedIn.

Show Less
Last Updated: April 25, 2023
2 minute engagement
Comment leads to seven-figure settlement
You read HRMorning's newsletter. Beacon's Daily Brief is the version tuned to you: it skips what you've already read and leads with what you've asked Beacon about. Get your Daily Brief →

“The law requires companies to make hiring decisions based on an applicant’s qualifications, not gender stereotypes,” said EEOC Chair Charlotte A. Burrows in a recent press release announcing a seven-figure settlement for an undetermined group of women.

Here’s what happened at a company in Ohio.

Trucking company – or boys’ club?   

R&L Carriers, Inc. and R&L Carriers, Shared Services, LLC (R&L Carriers), a nationwide trucking company headquartered in Ohio that specializes in less-than-a-load delivery, will pay $1.25 million to a class of female applicants.

According to the EEOC’s lawsuit, the company discriminated against women in hiring for loader positions at its location in Wilmington, Ohio, between 2010 and 2017. Although a few women were hired as loaders, most female applicants were rejected or steered to different positions because of their sex, the EEOC asserted.

Alleged comments reveal gender stereotypes in hiring decisions

Specifically, applicants and witnesses reported that they were told the company did not hire women for loader positions.

In the EEOC’s view, this violated Title VII, which prohibits discrimination based on sex and gender. As a result of the alleged conduct, there was a large difference in the percentage of female applicants who were hired compared to male applicants who were hired, the EEOC said.  

The company agreed to pay $1.25 million to settle the suit, which will be deposited into a settlement fund handled by a claims administrator. The EEOC will work with the claims administrator to locate the women and distribute the money.

The consent decree also orders the company not to discriminate against female applicants at its Wilmington facility and requires the company to:

  • Provide training that covers legal hiring procedures to appropriate employees
  • Notify recruiters and employees not to discriminate against women in hiring for loader positions
  • Invite rejected female applicants to reapply for Wilmington loader positions, and
  • Engage in outreach and recruitment efforts related to employing women as loaders.

Info: Company to Pay $1.25M to Settle EEOC Sex Discrimination Suit, 4/25/23.

Read it on Beacon
Open this article in Beacon, from HRMorning, and ask how it applies to your company. Every answer names its source.
Read it on Beacon
Get HRMorning's newsletter tuned to you every morning: your Daily Brief on Beacon →
Filed under
  • Employment Law
  • Share on

Get the HRMorning Newsletter

With HRMorning arriving in your inbox, you will never miss critical stories on labor laws, benefits, retention and onboarding strategies.

Get it free with a Beacon account. Beacon keeps your company's HR context at hand, and every answer names its source.
Create my free account

Free Training & Resources

EBOOK, White Papers

The Prevention Mandate: An Employer’s Framework for a Healthier Workforce

Provided by Personify Health

White Papers

Your guide to navigating CFO benefits questions

Provided by Maven Clinic

White Papers

A Year of Employee Appreciation Ideas

Provided by Inspirus

White Papers

Low Benefit Utilization Is a Messaging Problem: Fix It This Open Enrollment

Provided by Maven Clinic

SPONSORED CONTENT

HR Technology

Talent Management

sponsored content
AI Skills Gap: The 2026 Questions HR Leaders Are Asking, Answered

Courtesy of TRINET

Performance Management

Talent Management

sponsored content
Employee Recognition Program: What the First 6 Months Reveal About Whether It Will Last

Courtesy of INSPIRUS

Compensation

Recruiting

sponsored content
Salary Benchmarking: 6 Choices That Decide Whether Your Pay Data Holds Up

Courtesy of MARSH

Further Reading

  • Employment Law
Mandatory retirement policy costs employer nearly $7 million

Is mandatory retirement ever allowed? Or does it always violate laws banning age discrimination? The short answer: Federal law generally...

  • Employment Law
What’s an Adverse Employment Action? 5 Key Steps for HR Compliance

How bad does a job action have to be to create a right to sue? Sometimes, the answer is easy. For example, if an employee is terminated or ...

  • Employment Law
Employers in This State Just Got Some Great Workers’ Comp News

A workers’ comp ruling from Ohio’s highest court reverses decades of precedent and shortens the period during which total temporary dis...

  • Employment Law
How a (good) job description can squelch an ADA lawsuit

One way to win an ADA lawsuit is to show that the applicant or employee is not able to perform the job’s essential functions. To do th...

  • Employment Law
Customer behaving badly: Company pays $50K to settle third-party sexual harassment claim

Your frontline managers probably know the company has a legal obligation to protect employees from sexual harassment from co-workers. B...

  • Employment Law
Independent Contractors or Employees? New Court Ruling Focuses on Control

Misclassifying employees as independent contractors can leave employers facing significant wage-and-hour liability.  DMV Protection...

Get the latest from HRMorning in your inbox PLUS Beacon, free. Check it before you say it.

GET STARTED FREE
HR Morning Logo
  • Facebook
  • Linked In
  • ABOUT HRMORNING
  • ADVERTISE WITH US
  • WRITE FOR US
  • CONTACT
  • Employment Law
  • Benefits
  • Recruiting
  • Talent Management
  • Performance Management
  • HR Technology
  • Leadership & Strategy
  • Compensation
  • Policy & Procedures
  • Wellness
  • Staff Departure
  • HR Career & Self-Care
  • Health Care
  • Retirement Plans
  • DEI

HRMorning provides the latest HR and employment law news for HR professionals in the trenches of small-to-medium-sized businesses. Rather than simply regurgitating the day's headlines, HRMorning delivers actionable insights, helping HR execs understand what HR trends mean to their business.

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
Copyright© 2026 HRMorning
HRMorning Logo

WELCOME BACK!

Enter your username and password below to log in

Forget Your Username or Password?

Reset Password

Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.

Log In

Why do we need your credit card for a free trial?

We ask for your credit card to allow your subscription to continue should you decide to keep your membership beyond the free trial period.  This prevents any interruption of content access.

Your card will not be charged at any point during your 21 day free trial
and you may cancel at any time during your free trial.

During your free trial, you can cancel at any time with a single click on your “Account” page.  It’s that easy.