On December 12, 1996, several former Foreign Service employees of the United States Agency for International Development filed a lawsuit under 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA"), against the Agency and the Agency's former Administrator in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs were terminated by the Agency as part of its reduction in force ("RIF") in 1996 and allege that the defendants intentionally discriminated against them on the basis of age in the manner in which the RIF was designed and conducted. The plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, advanced theories of both disparate impact and disparate treatment.

On April 7, 1997, the Court (Judge Ricardo M. Rubina) certified the plaintiff class: 91 former Foreign Service employees who were forty years old at the time that the Agency selected them to be separated and whose employment was terminated as part of the RIF in 1996.

On March 22, 1999, the Court granted Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' disparate-impact claim, holding that the ADEA does not provide for a theory of liability based on disparate-impact. Evans v. Atwood, 38 F.Supp.2d 25 (Dist. D.C. 1999).

On October 3, 2000, the Court approved the Proposed Class Settlement Agreement, resulting in $5.5 million in damages as well as various forms of injunctive relief. The agreement stipulated that preferential consideration must be given to class members with respect to Personal Service Contracts ("PSCs") for three years. Specifically, the agreement stipulated that class members must be allowed to apply for PSCs on a non-competitive basis--prior to the Agency advertising the PSCs to the public.

The Court retained jurisdiction for three years from the date of the settlement's approval. The case is now closed.

Jordan Rossen - 08/26/2010


compress summary