There’s something almost counterintuitive about a discrimination lawsuit targeting a minority-owned business. 99 Ranch Market, a chain with fresh lychee, live fish tanks near the entrance, and brands that many immigrant families grew up with, established its reputation by catering to Asian-American communities across the nation. But federal regulators are now saying that what happened behind the scenes, in manager offices and on scheduling spreadsheets, tells a very different story.
Tawa Supermarket Inc., the parent company of 99 Ranch Market in Buena Park, was sued by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which claimed that the chain routinely discriminated against non-Chinese employees. The complaint claims that the issues started in 2016 after a change in the company’s leadership. That timing is important. It implies that this was structural rather than random or isolated and that it allegedly occurred at several store locations in more than a dozen states.
The specific claims are worth slowing down on. The EEOC claims that non-Chinese employees were denied promotions, scheduled for fewer hours, and paid less than their Chinese counterparts for similar work. According to the lawsuit, non-Chinese managers were fired and replaced with Chinese employees in certain instances. The complaint goes further, describing the conduct as intentional and done with malice — language that signals this isn’t a case of accidental oversight or paperwork errors.
Tawa swiftly pushed back. The business said in a statement that it intends to defend itself in court and that it thinks the EEOC’s allegations are baseless. “Tawa is committed to providing equal employment opportunities and does not tolerate discrimination or retaliation of any kind,” the statement said. We don’t learn much about what really transpired inside those stores from that typical corporate response. It is a completely different story if that defense is successful in court.
What makes this case unusual, at least procedurally, is the EEOC’s decision to file suit at all. Before going to court, federal employment regulators usually prefer to settle disagreements through administrative conciliation. The fact that they filed and are asking for a jury trial indicates that the agency came to the conclusion that the company was unwilling to make a significant settlement. Although the EEOC appears to have started its investigation as early as 2022, it is also uncommon for the agency to pursue litigation over behavior that started almost ten years ago, according to Berkeley-based labor lawyer Anthony Sperber.
It is difficult to overlook the wider ramifications of this. The EEOC’s acting general counsel said plainly that being a Chinese-owned supermarket doesn’t give a company license to favor Chinese workers over others. That statement is a signal to the industry as a whole, not just to 99 Ranch. In many ethnic retail settings, cultural affinity in hiring occurs covertly. Regulators are making it clear that they treat it in the same manner as they would any other type of national origin discrimination under Title VII.
The final result is still unknown. These kinds of lawsuits can drag on for years, and businesses the size of Tawa frequently have the financial means to fight hard. However, the public attention this case is garnering will make it difficult to turn back. Questions are coming from customers who grew up shopping at 99 Ranch. Employees at ethnic grocery chains across the country are probably thinking about their own workplaces a little differently this week.
The case is currently pending in the Central District of California U.S. District Court. The government wants it heard by a jury. That alone says something about how seriously federal regulators are treating these allegations — and how far they’re willing to go to make the point stick.
