Il Fornaio, a California-based Italian restaurant chain, will pay $3,000,000 to settle a federal lawsuit. The EEOC alleged that supervisors and employees sexually harassed female workers, many of them teenagers. It also alleged that the company retaliated against women who complained. California law prohibits sexual harassment at work, including the conduct at issue in the Il Fornaio case.
What the EEOC Alleged Against Il Fornaio
The EEOC alleged that supervisors and employees across Il Fornaio’s restaurants “repeatedly subjected” these women to sexual harassment. In the agency’s description, the harassment included “forceful groping in restaurant bathrooms, multiple instances of grabbing female employees’ private parts, requests for sexual favors, and explicit references to sexual activities.”
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is the federal agency that enforces workplace discrimination laws. It says “many” of the female employees in this case were teenagers.
The EEOC also alleged that the women complained and that Il Fornaio “failed to stop it.” It alleged that the company “retaliated against many of the female employees.” According to the agency, “several female employees had no choice but to resign.”
The EEOC filed suit in August 2022 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Before suing, it tried to resolve the matter through conciliation, its pre-lawsuit settlement process. On October 13, 2026, the agency announced that Il Fornaio (America) LLC will pay $3,000,000 and provide other relief to settle the case. The EEOC describes the company as a chain with 15 locations in California and Nevada.
Beatriz B. Andre is acting regional attorney for the EEOC’s Los Angeles District. She said that “during this case, we learned of at least 100 women negatively affected by Il Fornaio’s work environment.”
EEOC Settlements vs. Individual Lawsuits: How the Remedies Differ
When the EEOC sues, it acts for the public as well as for the workers involved. Its cases often end with a consent decree—a settlement the court approves and can enforce like any court order. These decrees often require changes inside the company for a set number of years. Common terms include new policies, training, outside monitors, and reports to the agency. In a group case like this one, the workers the agency identifies share the money.
Individual employment cases usually look different. Most involve one worker, often after she has left the job. Most end in a negotiated settlement that pays money. Court-ordered changes to how an employer operates—called injunctive relief—are uncommon in these cases. A worker who has moved on usually wants compensation, not oversight of a company she has left. Employers also rarely agree to that kind of oversight in a private settlement.
The money can differ too. Title VII caps combined compensatory and punitive damages at between $50,000 and $300,000, depending on the employer’s size. FEHA has no such cap. A worker suing under FEHA can seek lost pay, damages for emotional distress, punitive damages in appropriate cases, and attorney’s fees.
The EEOC also sues in only a small share of the charges it receives. Most workers who pursue a harassment claim must do so through their own lawyer.
What California Law Says About Sexual Harassment at Work
The EEOC sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In the agency’s words, this federal law “prohibits a hostile workplace environment based on sex, including sexual harassment, as well as retaliation against individuals who complain about sexual harassment or engage in other protected activity.”
The Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Government Code section 12900 et seq., also protects California workers. Its main prohibitions are in section 12940, and several of them apply directly to the kind of conduct alleged here.
- Harassment because of sex is unlawful. Section 12940(j) makes it unlawful to harass “an employee, an applicant, an unpaid intern or volunteer” because of sex. The statute defines harassment because of sex to include sexual harassment. It adds that “[s]exually harassing conduct need not be motivated by sexual desire.”
- Coworker harassment counts too. When the harasser is a coworker, the harassment is unlawful if the employer, “or its agents or supervisors, knows or should have known of this conduct and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective action.”
- Employers must try to prevent it. The statute says an employer “shall take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment from occurring.” Section 12940(k) makes it unlawful to “fail to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent discrimination and harassment from occurring.”
- The harasser can be personally liable. Under section 12940(j)(3), an employee who harasses someone in violation of the statute is personally liable for that harassment. That is true whether or not the employer knew about it.
- Firing or punishing someone for reporting harassment is unlawful. Section 12940(h) makes it unlawful to discharge or otherwise discriminate against a person “because the person has opposed any practices forbidden under this part.” It also protects a person who has filed a complaint, testified, or assisted in a proceeding.
- A worker need not lose pay or other job benefits to prove harassment. The statute says “[l]oss of tangible job benefits shall not be necessary in order to establish harassment.”
What This Means for Teen and Young Restaurant Workers
The EEOC’s announcement pointed to its Youth@Work initiative, which offers educational resources for young workers. A teenager whose adult supervisor sets her schedule may not know that what is happening to her is against the law, or that she can report it. Young workers are often seriously harmed by harassment and can permanently lose faith in the safety of their workplaces.
The statute’s harassment protection is broad. It covers “an employee,” and it also covers applicants, unpaid interns, and volunteers. The text quoted above sets no minimum age. It also does not limit protection to full-time or long-time workers.
The EEOC’s allegations also point to what happens after a complaint. Under California law, punishing someone for opposing harassment is its own violation. An employer’s failure to take reasonable steps to prevent harassment is also its own claim. That claim generally depends on proof of the underlying harassment. A worker who reports harassment and then sees her hours cut, her shifts changed, or her treatment worsen should write down what happened and when.
How Long You Have to File a Sexual Harassment Claim in California
Under FEHA, a worker generally has three years from the harassment to file a complaint. The complaint goes to the California Civil Rights Department (formerly the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, or DFEH). That is the state agency that enforces FEHA. Filing with the agency generally must come before a FEHA lawsuit. A federal charge with the EEOC has a shorter deadline, generally 300 days.
How to Know If What Happened at Work May Be Sexual Harassment or Retaliation
These are factual questions, not legal conclusions. If several describe your experience, it may be worth talking to a lawyer.
- A supervisor or coworker touched you in a sexual way, made sexual comments or requests, or talked about sexual activity at work.
- You told a manager, owner, or HR about it, in person or in writing.
- After you reported it, the conduct continued, or the person you reported still worked your shifts.
- After you reported it, your hours, schedule, section, or duties changed, or you were disciplined.
- You quit because the conduct did not stop.
Talk to a California Sexual Harassment Attorney
King & Siegel LLP has offices in Los Angeles and Sacramento and represents California employees statewide in sexual harassment, retaliation, discrimination, and wrongful termination claims, including claims by restaurant and hospitality workers. We have recovered tens of millions of dollars on behalf of sexual harassment victims, including numerous seven-figure settlements. Our attorneys understand the impact of harassment on your psychological safety and job security and are trained in trauma-informed advocacy. Consultations are free and confidential, and the firm works on a contingency basis.
If you were harassed at work or punished for reporting it, contact King & Siegel LLP for a free case review.
Julian Burns King graduated with honors from Harvard Law School and founded King & Siegel in 2018. As head of the Firm’s discrimination and harassment practice areas, she champions the rights of working parents and victims of workplace discrimination and harassment. She has been recognized as a “Rising Star” by Super Lawyers annually since 2018 and has recovered tens of millions of dollars on behalf of her clients.