A Consumer Protection and Employment Law Firm Serving California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

Prison management company, GEO Group has reached a settlement in a sexual harassment suit with the EEOC

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok

The GEO Group, Inc., a prison management company, that runs over 100 private prison facilities across the country, has reached a  $140,000 settlement with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Arizona Civil Rights Division (ACRD).

According to the   EEOC and ACRD,  GEO Group had an extreme tolerance for sexual harassment.   Specifically, the EEOC and ACRD alleged that male managers at GEO Group sexually harassed numerous female employees and fostered an atmosphere of sexual intimidation and harassment.  The sexual harassment included serious verbal harassment and physical harassment of the female employees.  They also alleged that another supervisor routinely made crude, obscene and suggestive sexual remarks.  The EEOC and ACRD said that comments like these were made by supervisors, were frequent and were often made in front of other management officials, who did nothing to stop the harassment.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects workers from discrimination based upon sex, including sexual harassment, and from retaliation.  The EEOC and ACRD filed suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona (EEOC and ACRD v. The Geo Group, Inc., CV10-1995-PHX-SRB).

In addition to the monetary relief of $140,000 for 2 harassment victims the three-year consent decree settling the suit requires that GEO:


  • review, revise, post and distribute its anti-discrimination policies and procedures

  • provide training to all employees on gender discrimination and sexual harassment in the workplace

  • arrange for all complaints of sexual harassment and/or retaliation

  • establish procedures required for sexual harassment investigations

  • develop and implement a management evaluation system that includes EEO compliance, compliance with policies and laws prohibiting retaliation, and compliance with the decree.


“Managers must constantly be reminded of their obligation to maintain workplaces where employees are not subjected to illegal harassment or retaliation,” said Rose Daly-Rooney, lead counsel for the ACRD.  “Where managers fail to satisfy these obligations, it is the employer’s responsibility to correct the violations and prevent other violations from occurring.  These women and all women deserve to work without being harassed because of their sex.”

Rayford Irvin, district director of the EEOC’s Phoenix District Office, added, “When employers permit sexual harassment to occur in the workplace, they are violating federal law.”

Preventing workplace harassment through systemic litigation and investigation is one of the 6 national priorities identified by the Commission’s Strategic Enforcement Plan (SEP).

If you have suffered harassment in the work place, please call California Employment Attorney, Todd M. Friedman for a free consultation.

Quick Navigation

Free Consultation

Undisclosed
Settlement

TCPA class action against the Los Angeles Times. Final approval granted 2014.

More Details
$750,000
Settlement

Common fund class-wide TCPA settlement against home healthcare provider. Final approval granted.

More Details
$27.6M
Settlement

TCPA class action certified on behalf of approximately 2,000,000 class members under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3). Subsequently settled on a Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) basis. Final approval granted.

More Details
$5.2M
Settlement

/

Unruh Act class action on behalf of approximately 240,000 consumers challenging Tinder’s age-based differential pricing for its subscription service. Final approval granted; subsequently went up on appeal.

More Details
$390,000
Settlement

TCPA class action alleging HD Supply sent unauthorized marketing text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without consent between October 21, 2011 and July 26, 2017. Presided over by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Case terminated January 29, 2018.

More Details
$1,500,000
Settlement

/

TCPA class action against a Kansas-based payday lender alleged to have contacted consumers via prerecorded calls on their cell phones to collect alleged debts without consent. California federal judge granted final approval.

More Details
$6,500,000
Settlement

/

Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 class action certified by contested motion under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of over 40,000 class members whose calls were recorded without their knowledge or consent. Final approval granted.

More Details
$13,000,000
Settlement

/

$13 Million Class action alleging HSBC recorded consumer telephone calls without knowledge or consent in violation of California’s Privacy Statute (Penal Code § 632.7). California Federal Judge granted final approval.

More Details
$34,000,000
Settlement

/

One of the largest TCPA class action settlements in U.S. history at time of approval. Alleged Chase used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact consumers on their cell phones without prior express consent from July 2008 through December 2013. Settlement class included over 32 million members. Final approval granted March 2016.

More Details
$150,000,000
Settlement

/

Class action on behalf of over 100,000 owners of GM vehicles equipped with allegedly defective LG-manufactured batteries posing fire and safety risks. Litigation commenced December 2020. U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg indicated preliminary approval of the $150 million settlement.

More Details
$100,000,000
Settlement

/ /

Landmark gig-economy class action. DoorDash drivers in California and Massachusetts alleged they were wrongly classified as independent contractors rather than employees. Firm served as class counsel. Final approval granted January 13, 2022 — the largest gig-economy worker class settlement in U.S. history at the time.

More Details

Office Locations

Copyright 2025 Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. All Rights Reserved.