Pitt Ohio To Pay $2.4 Million To Settle Discrmination Suit

[Opie]

Pitt Ohio Express has agreed to pay 2.43 million dollars to settle a gender discrimination case brought by the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The EEOC's complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. The complaint alleged that Pitt Ohio denied qualified female applicants employment as drivers and dockworkers since 1997, while hiring males for these same positions, despite the fact that the women were qualified for these jobs.

Pitt Ohio entered into a consent decree with EEOC whereby Pitt Ohio agree to pay 2.43 million dollars to the class of women affected, and to offer employment to the class of women denied jobs. Pitt Ohio did not admit to any violations of the Civil Rights Act. Pitt Ohio also agree to equal employment opportunity training for its supervisors. Class members must file claims not later than February 16, 2009. The settlement proceeds will be held in a common fund administered by EEOC for distribution to the claimants/class members. Pitt Ohio is required to offer at least 40 jobs to class members, 26 driving jobs and 16 dock jobs.

The Court approved the on January 26, 2009.

Here is a link to the consent decree:
http://www.eeoc.gov/consent/pitt-ohio/consent.html

Here is a link to a BNA Daily Labor Reporter Article concerning the consent decree:
BNA Daily Labor Report: $2.4 Million Penalty in Sex Discrimination Case | Teamsters for a Democratic Union

Paul Taylor
Truckers Justice Center
Employment Lawyer Burnsville Minnesota Wrongful Termination Whistleblower Attorney

NOTHING IN THIS POST SHOULD BE CONSTRUED AS CREATING AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.

[prime rib]

Those Hammil Bros are always shooting themselves in the foot.
Both at Pitt and Pjax,,,

[catfish0715]

yep, it's nice that we can now allow everyone to work here. Even those that are unable to perform some of the task's men are expected to do.

[catfish0715]

Maybe I was hasty in my first judgement, this mean's I won't have to do some of the thing's expected of me now. It's also nice how a lawyer put the message out there, just to inform any of those affected. Could that last link be, trolling for client's?

[Opie]

Catfish said

It's also nice how a lawyer put the message out there, just to inform any of those affected. Could that last link be, trolling for client's?

Opie says: It was not my case so I would get nothing from it. If the decision went against the employees and in favor of Pitt Ohio, I would post that also.

[catfish0715]

Except it didn't go against the employee's or Pitt Ohio, it went against OUR company. The people involved were not employee's, trust me, if a woman can do what I do, she deserve's the job. Should a company be forced to lower it's production standard ? This is LTL trucking, dragging a pallet jack with 1500 lbs of book's on it, 2 wheelin a 1000 lbs of candy through the mall. Hand unloading 30,000 lbs of paper in the summer at the school's. All this did was guarantee the men will have to carry HER load and she will be off on some volume load.