Below is a review of the posts on Facebook and LinkedIn from the past week. You can check out the full posts by clicking on the links.
NOTE: remember that we now post every other day.
The posts on Monday 4/13/2026, here and here, explained restaurant settles EEOC sexual harassment allegations (including partners who watched and did nothing).
The EEOC announced in early March that River’s Edge Bar and Grill (in Florida), agreed to pay $65,000 to settle the suit. Let’s take a closer look.
Per the complaint, the restaurant’s co-owner allegedly engaged in sexually harassing behavior toward a female server, including by propositioning her and more as detailed in the post. He also allegedly behaved similarly to female employees. But it gets worse …
The other two owners allegedly witnessed the harassment and failed to take action to stop it. Then, after complaining multiple times to one of them, the female server said she was “going to do something about” the behavior and was fired, according to EEOC. Yes, again ugh.
Unsurprisingly, the EEOC sued River’s Edge for allegedly subjecting the female server and a class of female employees to a sexually hostile work environment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC also alleged other violations of Title VII as noted in the post.
River’s Edge denied the allegations (but did not respond to a request for comment by press time). The parties consent decree (settlement) is linked in the post.
Statements from the EEOC’s Field Office and Regional Attorney are in the post. They also note that “unchecked authority resulted in harm that could have been prevented.”
The court-approved settlement requires the restaurant’s three owners, who are brothers, to undergo live, one-hour in-person training annually for the three years the consent decree is in effect. Who is to conduct the training and what it must include is part of the settlement and detailed in the post.
Additionally, the restaurant must revise its sexual harassment policy to include a formal, written procedure for addressing sexual harassment allegations. The policy must also provide examples of prohibited conduct including those things listed in the post.
The $65,000 settlement payment includes $45,000 for the server who was fired and $20,000 to another class member.
TAKEAWAY: An employer, and its owners, are responsible for following the law – it can be costly (in terms of damage to employees and the pocketbook) to do otherwise.
The posts on Wednesday 4/15/2026, here and here, gave us a Homebuyer’s Guide: What to Know Before Purchasing in a Community (Condominium, Cooperative or Homeowners) Association.
Buying a home in a community association comes with unique benefits and responsibilities. If you’ve never lived in a homeowners association, condominium, or housing cooperative, it’s important to understand how these communities work BEFORE signing on the dotted line.
First, what is a community association? It is a residential community governed by a set of rules and managed by a volunteer board of homeowners. Today, community associations are a major part of the housing market – see our posts of Monday 3/30/2026, here and here, for some of the statistics.
Community associations continue to grow in popularity because they offer:
- Well-maintained neighborhoods with professionally managed common areas;
- Shared amenities like pools and the other things listed in the post;
- Consistent standards that help protect property values;
and more things that are listed in the post.
“Community associations are increasingly shaping the housing market, helping maintain property values and vibrant, well-kept neighborhoods,” explains Dawn M. Bauman, CAE, chief executive officer of Community Associations Institute. Research from the Foundation for Community Association Research (which is linked in the post) supports the appeal – including an 86% neutral or positive satisfaction rating!
But it’s real estate, meaning there is a big price tag. And usually it is the principal residence, making it even more important. So before purchasing, you should carefully review key documents that explain how the community operates including the Bylaws (which serve the purposes noted in the post), (Declaration of) covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) (again, their purpose is in the post), and the other documents listed and described in the post. All together the documents help buyers understand their rights, responsibilities, and any limitations that come with owning and living in the community.
There are some questions that a potential buyer should ask before purchasing, including (1) What are the monthly assessments? What do they cover? Are there planned increases? (2) Does the community have a reserve fund for major repairs? Is it properly funded? (3) Are there rental or age restrictions? (4) What are the rules for pets and other common facets of today’s everyday life? And more that is listed in the post.
Since it’s such a big investment, it’s nice to know what other resources are out there. For more practical guidance and expert insights, Community Associations Institute offers Community Association Living: An Essential Guide for Homeowner Leaders (which is linked in the post). That is a free digital publication with an online course (also linked in the post) designed to help HOA residents and board members navigate governance, finances, and community rules with confidence.
TAKEAWAY: Purchasing in a community association can offer long-term value, convenience, and a strong sense of community, especially when buyers take the time to understand how it operates. A community association lawyer can answer questions before or after purchase.
The bonus post on Thursday 4/16/2026, noted that Austin Law Firm is proud to have been an exhibitor and lunch sponsor for the Community Associations Institute, Keystone Chapter’s annual multi-day expo. The expo has many benefits, some of which are listed in the post. Great way for homeowner leaders, community managers and other industry professionals to all come together.
TAKEAWAY: Healthy community associations often require homeowner leaders and industry professionals to come together – what better way to meet and interact than a targeted conference!
The posts on Friday 4/17/2026, here and here, alerted that complying with customers’ race-based preferences violates Title VII, EEOC lawsuit warns.
Mid-Michigan Home Health & Hospice allegedly refused to assign a Black certified nursing assistant to certain home visits because it believed the clients didn’t want to be assigned Black employees, the EEOC claimed in a Feb. 24 lawsuit (for which the complaint is linked in the post).
Per the complaint, the Black CNA was hired as a part-time employee, although she made it clear she wanted to work full-time, or as close to full-time as possible. She Black CNA provided in-home bathing assistance to patients. When she asked the HR director why a White CNA hired after her was getting more hours than she was, she was allegedly told that patients in the area “are from old times” and “don’t care for Black people.” But that’s not all; instead of assigning the Black CNA to patients in the area at issue, which was close to where she lived, Mid-Michigan frequently scheduled her to visit patients 90 miles away (for which trips transportation was dealt with as noted in the post).
During the two months the Black CNA worked for the home care provider, she was assigned five times to the area, while three White CNAs were assigned there more than 135 times, according to the EEOC’s complaint. What the Black CNA did, and the result, is in the post. (Can anyone say pretext?!)
The EEOC suit was filed for alleged race discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC’s statement on customer preferences in light of a illegal action or a suit is in the post. Mid-Michigan did not respond to a request for a comment.
TAKEAWAY: Customer preferences may feel like they put an employer in a bind, but they do not – employers must follow the law which does not allow discrimination on the basis of any protected characteristic. This is a time to just say no (or at least consult with an employment lawyer).