• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
McKenna Storer

McKenna Storer

AV Rated Chicago Law Firm

  • Home
  • Insurance
    • Insurance Defense
    • Toxic Tort and Mass Tort Litigation
    • Construction Law
    • Commercial Transportation Law
    • Insurance Coverage
    • Professional Malpractice Defense
    • Medical Malpractice Defense
    • Legal Malpractice Defense
    • Appellate Practice
  • Business
    • Corporate Law & Commercial Litigation
    • Litigation Defense
    • SBA Lending
    • Commercial Real Estate
    • Appellate Practice
    • Health Care Law
    • Business Formation
    • Data Privacy and Cyber Liability
    • Employment Law
    • Employment Litigation
    • Workplace Harassment
  • Individual
    • Estate Planning
    • Wills and Trusts
    • Real Estate
    • Mediation Services
  • Banking Law
  • Our Attorneys
  • Our Firm
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
    • Chicago Office
    • Woodstock Office
  • Show Search
Hide Search

An EEOC Subpoena Can Greatly Expand The Scope Of The Initial Discrimination Charge

Kristin Dvorsky Tauras · April 13, 2016 ·

In EEOC v. Aerotek, Inc., No. 15-1690, March 4, 2016, 7th Circuit, the EEOC filed suit against the employer and applied for an order to enforce the EEOC’s administrative subpoena against the employer (a temporary staffing agency). The EEOC had investigated the employer to assess the employer’s compliance with the ADEA. The EEOC sought information regarding “all” the staffing agency’s clients’ job requisition requests of the employer. The EEOC also asked for information about “all” persons that the employer referred for employment to the staffing agency’s clients. The staffing agency “partially” complied with the subpoenas. The information taken from that compliance revealed hundreds of discriminatory job requests by the staffing agency’s clients who attempted to limit referrals to younger individuals. Further, the staffing agency removed information from their compliance documents that would identify clients seeking such referrals. The Court held the EEOC could properly seek the information they requested because: (1) the requested information was within the scope of the EEOC’s authority to investigate “potential” employment discrimination; and (2) the subpoenas were properly aimed at “any” discriminatory requests that were not recorded in the employer’s database. The Seventh Circuit rejected the staffing agency’s argument that disclosure was inappropriate because it would harm the staffing agency’s business relationships with their clients.

Employment Law, Legal Updates

About Kristin Dvorsky Tauras

Kristin Tauras has a diverse litigation background and an ability to formulate solutions to complex legal and factual issues. Clients appreciate that she can take the most esoteric legal issues, hone in on the essential elements to solve the problem and explain them in terms that are easy to understand. Read her full bio here: Kristin Dvorsky Tauras Bio

Chicago Office
McKenna, Storer
33 N. LaSalle, Suite 1400
Chicago, Illinois 60602
312.558.3900
312.558.8348
Mo,Tu,We,Th,Fr 8:30 am – 5:00 pm
Woodstock Office
McKenna, Storer
1060 Lake Avenue
Woodstock, Illinois 60098
815.334.9690
815.334.9697
Mo,Tu,We,Th 8:30 am – 5:00 pm

  • Home
  • Insurance
  • Business
  • Individual
  • Banking Law
  • Our Attorneys
  • Our Firm
  • Blog
  • Contact Us