A U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California decision ruling that Grimmway Farms – purportedly the largest grower, producer, and shipper of carrots in the world – engaged in a pattern or practice of disability discrimination against farmworkers. The ruling comes after the State of California Civil Rights Department (CRD) filed a lawsuit against the farm in 2021. As a result of the decision, the case can now move forward to trial on potential monetary damages and other forms of relief for affected workers.

The plaintiff, California’s Civil Rights Department (CRD), sued defendant Grimmway Enterprises, Inc.(Case No. 2:21-cv-01552-DAD-AC) under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). CRD alleges patterns or practices of disability discrimination against a group of over 600 employees referred to Grimmway’s “Interactive Process Section” (for handling disability accommodations). Claims include disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, failure to engage in the interactive process, retaliation, unlawful interference, and failure to prevent discrimination/retaliation.

According to CRD, while some employees were able to use workers’ compensation benefits, as soon as those benefits expired, they faced a choice: take unpaid leave or get back to work without accommodations. As a result, hundreds of workers were allegedly deprived of their rights and many were effectively terminated.

“This decision is a major victory for disability rights and the rights of farmworkers across California,” said CRD Director Kevin Kish. “The court has ruled loud and clear that forcing injured workers into unpaid leave is disability discrimination. Here in California, farmworkers have rights, they are protected, and we will not shy away from fighting on their behalf.”

In a more than 50-page decision on cross motions for summary judgment, the federal court found that Grimmway Farms engaged in systemic disability discrimination by automatically placing disabled workers on unpaid leave when other reasonable accommodations were available. The court also ruled that CRD may pursue relief on a group-wide basis.

The case proceeds to trial on the issues unresolved by the cross summary judgment motions as follows:

– – ADA-based claim 1 (discrimination) re: unpaid leave.
– – ADA/FEHA claims 2-3 (accommodation/interactive process) re: unpaid leave, assistive technology, and reassignment.
– – ADA/FEHA claims 1-3 re: assistive technology and reassignment.
– – Claims 4-5 (retaliation/interference).
– – Claims 6-7 (failure to prevent discrimination/retaliation), except sexual harassment prevention.
– – Defendant’s remaining affirmative defenses (e.g., good faith, no discrimination).
– – Punitive damages (disputed).

According to a report by kvpr (NPR Network) Grimmway Farms representatives disagreed with the Civil Rights Division’s complaint and said the matter is not yet fully resolved.

“We firmly disagree with CRD’s characterizations of the court’s pre-trial decisions, noting that many of the motions were resolved in Grimmway’s favor,” Officials wrote to KVPR. “The allegations do not reflect the principles or values that guide our company, and we will respectfully see the matter through trial and the proper legal process.”

Partial Summary Judgement Granted in Grimway Farms ADA Case