Texas Roadhouse caught discriminating, mad at agency

[Robin Garr]

Uh ... and using "testers" to nail a company that discriminates is wrong in what way exactly? Sorry, Texas Roadhouse. I think I'll just drive on by ...

Texas Roadhouse accuses EEOC of using testers

Texas Roadhouse Inc. has filed an amended complaint against the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, seeking to obtain information about the federal agency's possible use of testers to build a discrimination case against the Louisville-based steakhouse chain.

Texas Roadhouse (NASDAQ: TXRH) has claimed that the EEOC filed an age-discrimination lawsuit against the company without ever receiving an official complaint. Now, the company looks into the possibility that EEOC used testers at Texas Roadhouse stores.

Link to full story:
http://www.bizjournals.com/louisville/n ... t_20141222

Am I missing something, or has there been no determination on liability in this lawsuit yet?

if I were Texas Roadhouse, I wouldn't worry so much about the presence of "testers"....I'd worry about the presence of "tasters"!

[Robin Garr]

Am I missing something, or has there been no determination on liability in this lawsuit yet?

Well, it's a Business First article, so it's hard to judge its comprehensiveness or accuracy, but I took it as a shot back from Texas Roadhouse trying to call off an investigation on the basis of no formal complaint from a member of the public as opposed to a government "tester."

[Robin Garr]

if I were Texas Roadhouse, I wouldn't worry so much about the presence of "testers"....I'd worry about the presence of "tasters"!

Hey! You caught us discriminating! No fair, you should call ahead next time so we can be ready to hide our bigotry.

Uh ... and using "testers" to nail a company that discriminates is wrong in what way exactly? Sorry, Texas Roadhouse. .

The government has no complaints about the company. Based on something (or nothing!), they send in two people to apply for a job, one younger and one older, but with similar backgrounds. TX hired the younger. Government is suing.

Does this sound fair for you? We know nothing about their personalities, specific work experience, whatever. Maybe if the gov't did this with every restaurant in the chain, it would be meaningful. Or, if they sent in a dozen or two pairs to one location it might be meaningful. Or, if they had several complaints and then sent in ringers to "test" the location it might be more meaningful. I'm sorry, but two people with no prior complaints does not make a major case!

Here's an idea . . . send in two women, one 25 and one 75, to Hooters to apply for a waitress job. See what happens. I think I can predict this one!

Uh ... and using "testers" to nail a company that discriminates is wrong in what way exactly? Sorry, Texas Roadhouse. .[/quote

Here's an idea . . . send in two women, one 25 and one 75, to Hooters to apply for a waitress job. See what happens. I think I can predict this one!

Hmmm...if memory serves me correct didn't this happen except with a man and a woman and weren't Hooters cited for sexual discrimination? Not really remembering the outcome of that one.

The government has no complaints about the company. Based on something (or nothing!), they send in two people to apply for a job, one younger and one older, but with similar backgrounds. TX hired the younger. Government is suing.

Does this sound fair for you? We know nothing about their personalities, specific work experience, whatever. Maybe if the gov't did this with every restaurant in the chain, it would be meaningful. Or, if they sent in a dozen or two pairs to one location it might be meaningful. Or, if they had several complaints and then sent in ringers to "test" the location it might be more meaningful. I'm sorry, but two people with no prior complaints does not make a major case!

I read the same thing as you mentioned above. If they truly didn't have any prior complaints and their complete allegation is based on just sending into people it certainly looks like they were just Witch Hunting! I don't know if Texas Roadhouse is innocent or not but if the above facts are true it certainly looks like they were targeted for no reason.

[Robin Garr]

Witch Hunting!

Folks, there's a long-established body of law that governs civil-rights and discrimination against protected classes, and it goes back to the days when people suffering abuse and discrimination were appropriately fearful of retribution if they sought their legal rights. Or even worse, if they complained about mistreatment during a time when they had no legal rights. This has been true of African-Americans, other racial minorities, women, gays and lesbians, and the elderly and handicapped, Mark. There's good reason why the use of "testers" in ensuring the rights of protected classes in interstate commerce is both legal and just.

I'm not a lawyer, but I do know this.

So...

There was no complaint. And the Feds sent in two testers. If this is true, then they decided to prosecute a decision that comes down to a 50/50 proposition. How can a 50/50 decision, a coin flip in essence, prove any kind of bias?

Seems like something unstated is driving this prosecution.

So...

There was no complaint. And the Feds sent in two testers. If this is true, then they decided to prosecute a decision that comes down to a 50/50 proposition. How can a 50/50 decision, a coin flip in essence, prove any kind of bias?

Seems like something unstated is driving this prosecution.

That's exactly the point I was making when I referred to witch hunting! If the entire case is based solely on the hiring/not hiring of one of two testers, which is inferred from what we're reading, they are certainly just looking for a reason to prosecute Texas Roadhouse.

[Robin Garr]

, they are certainly just looking for a reason to prosecute Texas Roadhouse.

No, they are actively looking for evidence of discrimination against a protected class, which is their duty under civil-rights law.

, they are certainly just looking for a reason to prosecute Texas Roadhouse.

No, they are actively looking for evidence of discrimination against a protected class, which is their duty under civil-rights law.

Maybe they should start looking around for violations of the ADA statutes! They are very easy to find and you don't have to look very hard yet they seem to ignore them!

[Robin Garr]

Maybe they should start looking around for violations of the ADA statutes! They are very easy to find and you don't have to look very hard yet they seem to ignore them!

Absolutely right, Mark, and they do use testers. Budgets make it hard to have enough testers to be meaningful, though, because a lot of politicians don't want to ask people to cough up tax money for something that a lot of people don't want to pay for. Like civil rights. It's kind of a vicious circle.

But I don't see how we can argue that Texas Roadhouse should be immune from testers for age discrimination if we're not prepared to argue that the regulators should be tough on ADA violators.