The New York District Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission brought this suit against U.S. Aluminum, Inc., United States Bronze Powders, Inc., and UAW Local 1668 in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on August 11, 2006. The complaint alleged age discrimination in ...
read more >
The New York District Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission brought this suit against U.S. Aluminum, Inc., United States Bronze Powders, Inc., and UAW Local 1668 in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on August 11, 2006. The complaint alleged age discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act because the collective bargaining agreement between the employers and the union reduced severance pay for employees over 60 years old who were entitled to pensions. Employees over 65 years who were entitled to pensions received no severance pay at all. The EEOC sought injunctive relief and damages for the charging parties, two employees over the age of 60 who received reduced severance pay after the plant where they worked shut down. The case was assigned to Judge Mary L. Cooper.
The first complaint that the EEOC filed listed only the union and U.S. Aluminum, Inc. as defendant. On May 29, 2007, the EEOC filed its last amended complaint, which named all three defendants.
In late October 2007, all three defendants moved for summary judgment. They did not dispute any of the EEOC’s factual allegations, but they did dispute that their conduct had violated the ADEA. On December 3, the EEOC made a cross motion for summary judgment.
On May 27, 2008, the court granted the defendants’ motions for summary judgment, denied the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, and entered judgment in favor of the defendants. The court held that reducing severance pay for employees who are entitled to a pension did not violate the ADEA because the statute explicitly allowed for the coordination of severance pay and pension benefits in certain situations. 2008 WL 2224820. Reasoning that severance pay and pension benefits serve largely the same purpose (to provide a bridge to the newly unemployed person's next pursuit, either a new job or retirement), the court held that the agreement between the employers and the union was fair. No relief was awarded to any party.
The EEOC appealed this case to the Third Circuit but voluntarily dismissed it on September 10, 2008. (Docket Number: 08-03253). The docket ends after this date; the case is presumably closed.
Kevin Wilemon - 05/29/2008
Rebecca Strauss - 05/22/2018
compress summary
