Current:Home > FinanceConvenience store chain where Biden bought snacks while campaigning hit with discrimination lawsuit -DataFinance
Convenience store chain where Biden bought snacks while campaigning hit with discrimination lawsuit
View
Date:2025-04-17 23:20:29
A convenience store chain where President Joe Biden stopped for snacks this week while campaigning in Pennsylvania has been hit with a lawsuit by federal officials who allege the company discriminated against minority job applicants.
Sheetz Inc. which operates more than 700 stores in six states, discriminated against Black, Native American and multiracial job seekers by automatically weeding out applicants whom the company deemed to have failed a criminal background check, according to U.S. officials.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed suit in Baltimore against Altoona, Pennsylvania-based Sheetz and two subsidary companies, alleging the chain’s longstanding hiring practices have a disproportionate impact on minority applicants and thus run afoul of federal civil rights law.
Sheetz said Thursday it “does not tolerate discrimination of any kind.”
“Diversity and inclusion are essential parts of who we are. We take these allegations seriously. We have attempted to work with the EEOC for nearly eight years to find common ground and resolve this dispute,” company spokesperson Nick Ruffner said in a statement.
The privately held, family-run company has more than 23,000 employees and operates convenience stores and gas stations in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia, Maryland, Ohio and North Carolina.
The lawsuit was filed in federal court on Wednesday, the day Biden stopped at a Sheetz market on a western Pennsylvania campaign swing, buying snacks, posing for photos and chatting up patrons and employees.
Federal officials said they do not allege Sheetz was motivated by racial animus, but take issue with the way the chain uses criminal background checks to screen job seekers. The company was sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion and national origin.
“Federal law mandates that employment practices causing a disparate impact because of race or other protected classifications must be shown by the employer to be necessary to ensure the safe and efficient performance of the particular jobs at issue,” EEOC attorney Debra M. Lawrence said in a statement.
“Even when such necessity is proven, the practice remains unlawful if there is an alternative practice available that is comparably effective in achieving the employer’s goals but causes less discriminatory effect,” Lawrence said.
It wasn’t immediately clear how many job applicants have been affected, but the agency said Sheetz’s unlawful hiring practices date to at least 2015.
The EEOC, an independent agency that enforces federal laws against workplace discrimination, is seeking to force Sheetz to offer jobs to applicants who were unlawfully denied employment and to provide back pay, retroactive seniority and other benefits.
The EEOC began its probe of the convenience store chain after two job applicants filed complaints alleging employment discrimination.
The agency found that Black job applicants were deemed to have failed the company’s criminal history screening and were denied employment at a rate of 14.5%, while multiracial job seekers were turned away 13.5% of the time and Native Americans were denied at a rate of 13%.
By contrast, fewer than 8% of white applicants were refused employment because of a failed criminal background check, the EEOC’s lawsuit said.
The EEOC notified Sheetz in 2022 that it was likely violating civil rights law, but the agency said its efforts to mediate a settlement failed, prompting this week’s lawsuit.
veryGood! (322)
Related
- Hackers hit Rhode Island benefits system in major cyberattack. Personal data could be released soon
- AP Week in Pictures: North America
- Harvey Weinstein's 2020 rape conviction overturned by New York appeals court
- Was there an explosion at a Florida beach? Not quite. But here’s what actually happened
- What were Tom Selleck's juicy final 'Blue Bloods' words in Reagan family
- 17 states challenge federal rules entitling workers to accommodations for abortion
- Secret Service agent assigned to Kamala Harris hospitalized after exhibiting distressing behavior, officials say
- Brittany Mahomes and Patrick Mahomes’ Red Carpet Date Night Scores Them Major Points
- Toyota to invest $922 million to build a new paint facility at its Kentucky complex
- NFL draft trade tracker: Full list of deals; Minnesota Vikings make two big moves
Ranking
- Former Danish minister for Greenland discusses Trump's push to acquire island
- Mike Pinder, last original Moody Blues member, dies months after bandmate Denny Laine
- The Best Jean Shorts For Curvy Girls With Thick Thighs
- Dozens of Climate Activists Arrested at Citibank Headquarters in New York City During Earth Week
- John Galliano out at Maison Margiela, capping year of fashion designer musical chairs
- New reporting requirements for life-saving abortions worry some Texas doctors
- Kelly Ripa and Mark Consuelos Share Why Working Together Has Changed Their Romance
- Man admits to being gunman who carjacked woman in case involving drugs and money, affidavit says
Recommendation
McKinsey to pay $650 million after advising opioid maker on how to 'turbocharge' sales
Minneapolis smokers to pay some of the highest cigarette prices in US with a $15 per-pack minimum
Charges against Trump’s 2020 ‘fake electors’ are expected to deter a repeat this year
Fed plan to rebuild Pacific sardine population was insufficient, California judge finds
2025 'Doomsday Clock': This is how close we are to self
Harvey Weinstein's 2020 rape conviction overturned by New York appeals court
Why Emma Stone Wants to Drop Her Stage Name
Journalists critical of their own companies cause headaches for news organizations