Posts Tagged ‘North America’

SCRANTON – A federal judge has denied a motion filed by glass manufacturer Schott North America that sought the dismissal of a gender discrimination suit filed by six women who were laid off in 2004.
U.S. District Judge James M. Munley on Monday said the women had presented sufficient evidence to support their claims that a rating system the company employed in determining which workers would keep their jobs was biased in favor of males.

The suit, filed in 2006, alleges the rating system placed an improper amount of weight on skills utilized in jobs that were primarily held by men, compared to jobs that were held by women. That allowed men to score higher, resulting in more men than women retaining their jobs after a layoff at the company’s Duryea plant in October 2004, the suit says.

According to the suit:

Production workers at the plant were divided into two sections: “hot end” workers, who operated machines that produced glass, and “cold end” workers, who inspected the glass for defects and provided other finishing services. More than 95 percent of the hot end jobs were held by males, while roughly 76 percent of cold end jobs were held by females.

In 2004, Schott decided to cease production of a certain type of glass at the Duryea plant. That led to a layoff and the creation of a new position that combined the duties of hot end and cold end jobs. To determine which workers would get the new positions, the company devised a rating system that assigned a numeric score to certain job skills.

The lawsuit alleged that system was heavily weighted in favor of skills developed by hot end workers, even though the new position required a combination of skills used in both positions.

According to court documents, one-third of the 73 workers who were evaluated were female, but only two of the 36 positions that were created were awarded to women.

Schott claimed the hot end tasks were more difficult, thus it was proper to give those skills more weight. The plaintiffs maintained the cold end jobs were equally difficult. They alleged the matrix was a ruse designed to ensure more men than women would get the jobs.

In a 35-page ruling, Munley said the women had presented evidence that the rating system did not rate skills required for the job, but instead valued the skills that men were more likely to have than women.
Munley noted testimony by females who said there was a long-standing, hostile atmosphere toward women in the plant. Some had testified they were subjected to sexual harassment and were often belittled by male counterparts.

The suit was filed by the Equal Opportunity Commission on behalf of six women, who are represented privately by attorney Peter Winebrake of Philadelphia and Sean McDonough of Moosic.

Officials from Schott did not immediately return a phone message left at the Duryea plant late Monday afternoon

PRESS RELEASE
6-10-09

SCHOTT NORTH AMERICA, INC. TO PAY $1.45 MILLION TO SETTLE EEOC SEX BIAS SUIT

Company Laid Off Class of Women Workers Based on Gender, Federal Agency Said

SCRANTON, PA. — The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today announced a major settlement of a sex discrimination lawsuit for $1,450,000 and significant equitable relief against Schott North America, a multinational developer and manufacturer of special glass and specialty materials, components and systems, based in Elmsford, N.Y.

The EEOC charged that Schott laid off women because of their sex after a company reorganization in October 2004 of its specialty glass plant in Duryea, Pa. Prior to the reorganization, glass production at the plant was generally divided into two parts, the “hot end” and the “cold end”; 95.3% of the hot-end workers were male and 76.6% of the cold-end workers were female.

As part of the reorganization, the company 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. In its lawsuit, the EEOC charged that 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. The EEOC contended that 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.

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

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 anti-discrimination training of all supervisors and managers at the Duryea, Pa. facility; and the posting of a notice about the settlement.

“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.”

The EEOC filed suit (Civil Action No. 06-CV-1246) in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement out of court. 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.

Judith O’Boyle, the supervisory trial attorney responsible for handling the litigation, noted, “We are pleased that the parties were able to resolve this matter and that Schott agreed to a variety of remedial measures designed to prevent problems in the future.”

Karen McDonough investigated the charges of discrimination filed with the agency.

According to its web site, http://www.us.schott.com/, “SCHOTT Corporation is the North American headquarters and holding company for the SCHOTT Group. With 16 divisions and subsidiaries in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, SCHOTT Corporation employs approximately 2,500 people for the manufacture and distribution of special glass and glass-related systems. The SCHOTT Group employs 17,300 people worldwide and has sales of approximately $3 billion.

The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Further information about the EEOC is available on its web site at http://www.eeoc.gov/