Hotel’s former owner settles discrimination suit for $175K

The former owner of the Saipan Grand Hotel has agreed to a $175,000 settlement to resolve a discrimination lawsuit filed by four female employees who alleged they were sexually harassed at the hotel from 1998 to 2002.

Following the settlement, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Alex R. Munson yesterday dismissed the lawsuit that was filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on behalf of the four complainants.

On Dec. 23, 2005, the parties in the case agreed to the settlement embodied in a consent decree. Munson approved the consent decree on the same day. EEOC then filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the lawsuit.

Under the consent decree, Micro Pacific Development Inc., the former owner of the hotel, shall pay $175,000 in damages as full settlement of the discrimination claims.

The funds shall be paid by cashier’s check made payable to the four complainants. One will get $100,000, two will receive $30,000 each, and the other will be paid $15,000.

The parties said the consent decree is not an adjudication or a finding on the merits of the case and shall not be construed as an admission by any defendant of violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The EEOC previously filed the lawsuit on Sept. 23, 2004, on behalf of the four women. The Commission alleged that the women were subjected to a sexually hostile work environment. MPDI denied all claims.

After the initial filing of the suit, MPDI sold the hotel to Asia Pacific Hotels Inc. and decided to close its business on Saipan and dissolve by the end of January 2006.

On Sept. 12, 2004, EEOC filed an amended complaint, adding APHI as defendant under a theory of successor liability. The case, however, was settled before APHI was served with the amended complaint. APHI participated in the settlement of this action.

In 2001, APHI acquired the hotel and, although named in the lawsuit, was considered faultless in the matter.

As the current hotel owner, APHI has agreed to institute training and policies to protect workers from future discrimination for the next three years.

The parties also agreed to come up with a joint press statement, which was also filed in court.

In that statement, one of the complainants stated that she hopes the case will encourage employees who are scared to speak out about discrimination to contact the EEOC.

MPDI, for its part, expressed pleasure with the resolution of the matter.

“The company is pleased to put this matter behind it,” said attorney Michael Dotts, counsel for MPDI.

EEOC San Francisco District Director H. Joan Ehrlich stated: “We commend the MPDI and APHI for their cooperation in resolving this case.

“By avoiding time, expense, and disruption of protracted litigation, resolution is always in the interest of all parties involved,” Ehrlich said.

Attorney Colin Thompson, on behalf of MPDI, said that the company believes in training its supervisors to recognize and prevent sexual harassment.

“We want our employees to enjoy working for us. Our management values very hard with that goal in mind,” Thompson pointed out.

The lawsuit asserted that an assistant chef in one of the hotel’s restaurants sexually harassed the complainants, including physical, verbal and sexual harassment.

These allegations were all denied and the settlement avoids a determination of what actually happened, EEOC said.