In August 2006 the Phoenix District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona alleging discrimination on the basis of age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. Specifically, the complaint alleged that the defendants ...
read more >
In August 2006 the Phoenix District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona alleging discrimination on the basis of age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. Specifically, the complaint alleged that the defendants terminated the complaining party and a class of employees who were forty-years-old or older and made comments concerning the age of the complaining party.
In 2007, the parties entered settlement talks as they continued to engage in discovery. On December 17, 2007, TIN moved for summary judgment. On June 2, 2008, District Judge Neil Wake granted the defendant's motion on the grounds that "the EEOC has not provided direct evidence that the termination of [claimants] were motivated by age-based animus...TIN has articulated legitimate, nondiscrimination reasons for the terminations...[t]he EEOc has not established that TIN's articulated reasons are mere pretext." Therefore, "a reasonable fact-finder could not conclude that age discrimination was the real reason for the terminations of [claimants]." 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43193. The EEOC appealed this decision on July 31, 2008. The 9th Circuit reversed the lower court's decision and remanded the case for trial, finding that a jury could potentially find age discrimination. 349 Fed. Appx. 190.
On June 11, 2010, the parties entered a consent decree. The settlement enjoined the defendant from engaging in an employment practice that constituted age discrimination, including retaliation. Further, the defendant agreed to pay $250,000 to resolve the claims, provide training about the ADEA to employees, expunge references to the complaints from personnel files, provide neutral letters of references to claimants, modify its policies to ensure equal opportunity for employees of all ages, and file reports with the EEOC Phoenix District Office for the Duration of the decree (two years). Since there is no subsequent enforcement activity, presumably the matter closed finally in June 2012.
David Friedman - 05/20/2008
Rachel Barr - 01/04/2018
compress summary
