Bryant v. International Schools Services, Inc.
| Decision Date | 31 March 1982 |
| Docket Number | 81-1559,No. 81-1558,No. 81-1559,Nos. 81-1558,81-1558,s. 81-1558 |
| Citation | 675 F.2d 562 |
| Parties | 28 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 726, 28 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 32,579, 3 Ed. Law Rep. 827 Dottie D. Jernigan BRYANT and Theresa O. Lillibridge, Appellants in, v. INTERNATIONAL SCHOOLS SERVICES, INC., Appellant in |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
Yvette Weiss, Trenton, N. J., for appellants, Dottie D. Jernigan Bryant and Theresa O. Lillibridge.
Kenneth McCullough, McCarthy & Hicks, Princeton, N. J., for Intern. Schools Services, Inc.; Townley & Updike, New York City, of counsel.
Before GIBBONS and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges, and McCUNE, District Judge. *
This is an appeal from the decision of the district court entered in a sex discrimination action brought by two teachers, Dottie Jernigan Bryant (Bryant) and Theresa O. Lillibridge (Lillibridge) against International Schools Service, Inc. (ISS). Bryant and Lillibridge, who had been employed by ISS at the American School in Isfahan, Iran, alleged in their suit that ISS's policy of awarding two different employment contracts with unequal benefits to persons hired to work in Iran constituted sex-based discrimination in violation of Title VII of This case raises significant questions regarding the applicability of Title VII to the overseas employment practices of a private American employer and the scope and meaning of that statute's proscription against sex-based discrimination in employment. Appellants' challenge to ISS's overseas contract policy vividly demonstrates how an increasing patina of subtlety and complexity has obscured alleged claims of sex discrimination. Here the defendant, ISS, admittedly hired persons to teach in Iran without regard to sex. And it admittedly awarded the more lucrative of the two employment contracts it offered teachers to a higher percentage of females than males. The problem, from appellants' perspective, however, is that a disproportionate number of the less munificent contracts went to married women living in Iran because of their husbands' employment with American companies in Iran. Having been members of this latter group, appellants now allege that such a result runs afoul of the statutory commands of Title VII.
the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. ("Title VII"). After a trial on the merits, the district court held that: (1) Title VII is applicable to ISS's employment practices in Iran; (2) appellants had established a prima facie case of sex discrimination in violation of Title VII under both the disparate impact and disparate treatment theories; and (3) although ISS had legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for its dual contract policy and its policy had a manifest relationship to the employment in question, the method by which ISS implemented its policy unlawfully discriminated against appellants on the basis of their sex. Bryant v. International Schools Services, Inc., 502 F.Supp. 472 (D.N.J.1980). In a final judgment entered February 17, 1981, Bryant was awarded $3,437.50 and Lillibridge, $6,568.75. Total costs of $1,483.36 were also awarded to both appellants, and attorney's fees of $28,000 to their attorney. Bryant and Lillibridge and ISS appeal from the district court's decision. 1
Though we are sensitive to the salutory command of Congress that Title VII be used to compel the "removal of artificial, arbitrary and unnecessary barriers to employment when the barriers operate invidiously to discriminate on the basis of racial or other impermissible classification," Griggs v. Duke Power Company, 401 U.S. 424, 431, 91 S.Ct. 849, 853, 28 L.Ed.2d 158 (1971), and to prevent the perpetuation of discriminatory treatment based on sexual stereotypes, 2 we find that appellants' claims constitute a novel extension of the scope and meaning of Title VII's prohibition against sex discrimination in employment. Because we do not believe that the appellants have shown how appellee's contract policy impermissibly discriminated against, limited, segregated or classified appellants because of their sex, 3 we now reverse.
The facts in this case are largely undisputed and have been thoroughly and carefully
set forth by the trial court in Bryant, 502 F.Supp. at 474-80. We include a detailed summary of them here because of the nature and extent of the claims before us.
ISS is a private, nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of the District of Columbia. From its headquarters in Princeton, New Jersey it contracts with overseas governments and corporations to provide comprehensive educational services for the children of Americans employed abroad. Its services include staffing and operating schools, educational consultation, purchasing and procurement of materials and supplies, and financial management.
Pursuant to a contract with Bell Helicopter International, ISS established the American School in Isfahan, Iran (the "American School" or "School") in 1973. The contract called for ISS not only to establish a school comprised of grades kindergarten through twelve, but also to hire and supervise all school staff. Although the school was set-up under ISS's contract with Bell Helicopter, it was open to the overseas employees of other companies per arrangements between those companies and Bell Helicopter. Beginning in 1976, ISS contracted directly with the Iranian government to operate the school on a cost plus basis. Revolutionary turmoil in Iran forced the permanent closing of the school on January 6, 1979.
From its inception in 1973, the American School was staffed primarily by teachers hired through the ISS referral service in Princeton, New Jersey. Additional teachers, if needed, were recruited from among Americans already living in Iran. Since the wives of Grumman Aerospace Corporation and Bell Helicopter employees constituted the largest pool of unemployed Americans, teachers hired locally were usually women.
The essence of appellants' case is rooted in ISS's policy of awarding its teaching staff at the American School two different contracts. The two contracts, known as ISS-sponsored and local-hire contracts, had substantially different benefits beyond those common to all staff. 4 An ISS-sponsored contract was offered to all teachers hired through the ISS referral service in Princeton, New Jersey. Those hired in Isfahan received either an ISS-sponsored contract or a local-hire contract. Teachers awarded the more desirable ISS-sponsored contracts received eleven additional benefits not given to those awarded local-hire contracts. 5 ISS's personnel policies included specific reference to its dual contract policy. 6 Although ISS-sponsored contracts were variously termed expatriate or foreign contracts, the policies made clear that, whatever their name, those contracts were reserved for only persons "sponsored" by ISS. 7
Between 1975 and 1979 when either one or both appellants were teaching at the American School, 98 local-hire contracts and 476 ISS-sponsored contracts were awarded. Ninety-seven of the local-hire contracts went to married females, one to a married male. 8 Two hundred forty (50.42%) of the ISS-sponsored contracts were awarded to women, 92 to married females, 148 to single females. Two hundred thirty-six ISS-sponsored contracts went to males (49.58%), 156 to married males, 80 to single males. 9
The appellants in this case were among the 97 teachers hired by ISS under local-hire contracts to teach in the American School in Isfahan. Bryant, an elementary school teacher, initially sought a teaching position through ISS's referral service in Princeton, N. J. in 1975. This was done in the expectation of accompanying her husband to Iran where he was to work for Grumman. She was told at that time that no teaching positions were available, but was advised to recontact ISS when she arrived in Iran.
After her arrival in Isfahan in November 1975, Bryant was hired by ISS as a substitute teacher for the American School. Her full-time employment under a local-hire contract began in April 1976. This contract provided the benefits which were extended to all teachers, but included none of the extra benefits provided in an ISS-sponsored contract. 10 The district court found that when Bryant was hired, she was not informed that there were two kinds of contracts or shown the School's personnel policies. When she later became aware of the additional benefits and made inquiries about them, she was informed by the School that she would not receive them.
Bryant renewed her contract with ISS in October, 1976. As with her previous one, it too was a local-hire contract. In March, 1977, Bryant and her husband, Marc Jernigan, decided to separate and seek a divorce. She completed the 1976-77 school term, then returned to the United States.
Lillibridge, who was living in Iran with her husband, a pilot with Bell Helicopter, first sought a teaching position with ISS in the summer of 1975. It was not until October, 1975, however, that she was hired by ISS as a sixth grade teacher for the American School in Isfahan. Like Bryant she received a local-hire contract, and like Bryant, she was not informed that there was another type of contract or shown the School's personnel policies.
When Lillibridge made inquiries about the additional benefits which some teachers were receiving, she was told by the School that those allowances were only offered to persons hired in the United States and not to persons like herself who were hired in Iran. At a faculty meeting in 1978, ISS explained that the additional benefits paid under the ISS-sponsored contracts were not paid to persons hired locally because the latter received the additional benefits through their husbands' employment contracts.
Lillibridge renewed her teaching contract for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Spaulding v. University of Washington
..."an increasing patina of subtlety and complexity has obscured alleged claims of sex discrimination," Bryant v. International Schools Services, Inc., 675 F.2d 562, 565 (3d Cir.1982) (challenge to policy giving unequal employment benefits to people hired to work in Iran), we must be sensitive......
-
Cleary v. United States Lines, Inc.
...applies extraterritorially is Bryant v. International Schools Services, Inc., 502 F.Supp. 472 (D.N.J.1980), rev'd on other grounds, 675 F.2d 562 (3d Cir.1982). Bryant, however, was reversed by the Third Circuit, which never reached the issue of the extraterritorial application of Title VII.......
-
US v. Lansdowne Swim Club
...must be critically examined and all facts and circumstances must be considered." (citations omitted). In Bryant v. International Schools Servs., Inc., 675 F.2d 562, 573 (3d Cir.1982), the Court observed that "the story statistics tell depends, not unlike beauty, upon the eye and ear of the ......
-
Boureslan v. Aramco, Arabian American Oil Co.
...without discussion. See Bryant v. International Schools Serv., Inc., 502 F.Supp. 472 (D.N.J.1980), rev'd on other grounds, 675 F.2d 562, 577 n. 23 (3d Cir.1982); Seville v. Martin Marietta Corp., 638 F.Supp. 590 (D.Md.1986) (adopting Bryant's reasoning); Love v. Pullman Co., 13 Fair Empl.Pr......
-
Sex Discrimination
...employees must make the same benefits available for the husbands and families of female employees. See Bryant v. Int’l Sch. Servs., Inc. , 675 F.2d 562, 573 n.18 (3d Cir. 1982); Schafer v. Bd. of Public Educ. of the Sch. Dist. of Pittsburgh , 903 F.2d 243 (3d Cir. 1990) (employer that offer......
-
Sex Discrimination
...employees must make the same benefits available for the husbands and families of female employees. See Bryant v. Int’l Sch. Servs., Inc. , 675 F.2d 562, 573 n.18 (3d Cir. 1982); Schafer v. Bd. 19-683 sex DisCriminaTion §19:2 plaintiff alleging intentional sex discrimination uses circumstant......
-
Sex discrimination
...employees must make the same benefits available for the husbands and families of female employees. See Bryant v. Int’l Sch. Servs., Inc. , 675 F.2d 562, 573 n.18 (3d Cir. 1982); Schafer v. Bd. of Public Educ. of the Sch. Dist. of Pittsburgh , 903 F.2d 243 (3d Cir. 1990) (employer that offer......
-
Sex Discrimination
...employees must make the same benefits available for the husbands and families of female employees. See Bryant v. Int’l Sch. Servs., Inc., 675 F.2d 562, 573 n.18 (3d Cir. 1982); Schafer v. of Public Educ. of the Sch. Dist. of Pittsburgh, 903 F.2d 243 (3d Cir. 1990) (employer that offers chil......