News & Information

 

FEATURED PRODUCT

U.S. Master™ Wage-Hour Guide, 2009 Edition
Presents a first approach to the broad and complex controls under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and other statutes regulating employee wages and hours.

Learn More »

LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW — 06/16/09

Schott North America pays $1.45 million to settle suit for sex-based layoffs

A major sex discrimination lawsuit against Schott North America, a multinational developer and manufacturer of special glass and specialty materials, components and systems, has been settled for $1,450,000 and significant equitable relief, the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) advised on June 10, 2009. The federal agency alleged that Schott, based in Elmsford, New York, laid off women because of their sex after a reorganization in October 2004 of the company’s specialty glass plant in Duryea, Pennsylvania. Prior to the reorganization, glass production at the plant was generally divided into two parts, the “hot end” and the “cold end”; 95.3 percent of the hot-end workers were male and 76.6 percent of the cold-end workers were female.

As part of the reorganization, Schott created a new position of “melting line operator” and used a “skills matrix” to determine who would obtain these new positions. The glass company laid off employees whom it did not select for the melting line operator position. The skills matrix system benefited male employees, did not accurately measure the skills truly needed to perform the melting line operator job and had an adverse impact on female applicants – who were selected for layoff at a significantly higher rate than male employees, according to the EEOC’s lawsuit (MDPa, No 06-CV-1246). Six plaintiff intervenors and five class members were not selected for melting line operator positions and were laid off because of their sex, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the EEOC asserted.

In addition to the $1.45 million in monetary relief, the three-year consent decree provides substantial equitable relief, including: injunctive relief enjoining Schott from engaging in unlawful discrimination under Title VII or retaliation; annual antidiscrimination training of all supervisors and managers at the Duryea facility; and the posting of a notice about the settlement.

Schott did not admit liability in the consent decree, which is pending judicial approval. Sean P. McDonough, of the Dougherty, Leventhal & Price law firm, and Pete Winebrake, of The Winebrake Law Firm, LLC, represented plaintiff intervenors in their private claims against Schott.

“This significant settlement demonstrates the EEOC’s commitment to securing meaningful relief for victims of systemic sex discrimination,” Acting EEOC Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru said.

“Companies must make hiring and layoff decisions based on the individual’s qualifications and abilities, and not because of gender,” said EEOC Philadelphia District Director Marie M. Tomasso, who oversaw the agency’s administrative investigation which preceded the litigation. “The EEOC will take action if a company reorganization has an adverse impact on women.”

For more information on this and other topics, consult CCH Employment Practices Guide or CCH Labor Relations.

Visit our News Library to read more news stories.