Green v. United States Steel Corp.
| Decision Date | 01 August 1986 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 76-3673. |
| Citation | 640 F. Supp. 1521 |
| Parties | Elbert G. GREEN and Robert Danley, Individually and as representatives of persons similarly situated v. UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Richard Z. Freemann, Creed Black, Mark Stewart, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiffs.
Thomas Preston, Robert Talley, Philadelphia, Pa., for defendant.
On July 18, 1983 this Court held that defendant United States Steel Corporation (USS) violated Title VII by engaging in race discrimination against the class of black applicants who unsuccessfully sought employment in the production and maintenance department (P & M) at the USS Fairless Hills Plant during the following two periods: July 11, 1972 through December 31, 1974, and January 1, 1978 through December 31, 1979 (the "class period"). Green v. United States Steel Corp., 570 F.Supp. 254 (E.D.Pa.1983) (liability opinion).1 At the liability stage, plaintiffs proved, through the use of statistical evidence, that USS failed to hire black applicants in proportion to their percentage in the applicant pool, and that this failure had a discriminatory impact on blacks. This Court found that USS, in its hiring procedures, relied on an amalgam of largely subjective criteria, and its interviewers were not trained so as to ensure even-handed application of the procedures. Id. at 260. Moreover, the minimum hiring criteria for P & M positions were so low that they did not eliminate many applicants.2
The liability opinion explicates in great detail this Court's findings and the reasons therefore, and I incorporate it as if set forth herein. Only those portions essential to an understanding of this opinion will be repeated when necessary.
Following the liability opinion, the Court directed the parties to meet, identify issues pertinent to relief, and develop any information necessary to calculate the damages to be awarded to the class. Order of January 12, 1984.
The parties were able to agree on a basic framework, to compile a stipulated set of damages calculations (Ex. P-200), and to focus on the several remaining contested legal issues.
Both sides fully briefed the following issues, now ripe for this Court's disposition:
1. Whether applicants for summer positions in 1972 and 1973 are included in the class.
2. Whether the decertification notice sent in Dickerson precludes unsuccessful black applicants in 1972, 1973 and 1974 from recovering damages in Danley.
3. The proper USS employee reference group to use to compute back pay and attrition rates.
4. Which fringe benefits, if any, should be included in a back pay award.
5. The appropriate method for calculation of mitigation of damages (interim earnings).
6. Whether USS should be given a "credit" for those years in which they did not discriminate against, black applicants.
7. Whether plaintiffs are entitled to front pay, and if so, how it should be calculated.
8. Whether plaintiffs are entitled to pre-judgment interest, and if so, how it should be computed.
9. Whether plaintiffs are entitled to any additional monetary compensation to account for the tax effect of lump sum payments.
10. Who should bear the costs relating to the distribution of damages (including the cost of notice to the class members).
11. Whether plaintiffs are entitled to injunctive relief and, if so, how it should be fashioned.
The parties also presented testimony, documents and arguments to the Court at the damages trial held April 7-14, 1986. This Memorandum Opinion shall constitute the Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law, as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a).
1. A central purpose of Title VII is "to make persons whole from injuries suffered on account of unlawful employment discrimination." Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co., 424 U.S. 747, 763, 96 S.Ct. 1251, 1264, 47 L.Ed.2d 444 (1976) (citing Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 418, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 2372, 45 L.Ed.2d 280 (1975)).
2. Title VII gives district courts significant latitude to "order such affirmative action as may be appropriate, which may include, but is not limited to, reinstatement or hiring of employees, with or without back pay ... or any other equitable relief as the court deems appropriate." 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(g).
3. The goal at the damages stage is to award plaintiffs complete relief in order to make them whole, while at the same time not awarding plaintiffs damages which will punish defendant or give plaintiffs a windfall.
4. The assessment of damages has been facilitated by numerous factual and legal agreements reached by the parties before trial. The Court finds these agreements, noted and summarized below, to afford a fair and reasonable approach to the calculation of damages owed the plaintiff class.
5. USS conceded that back pay was an appropriate element of damages due the plaintiff class, and that this component "should be based upon the average annual wages earned by persons who were actually hired by USS in each of the liability periods." (Ex. P-200, Section IV at 11).
6. The Court finds it reasonable to calculate back pay in this fashion because, by definition, the plaintiff class was not hired by USS and therefore does not have an employment history at USS.
7. Moreover, the liability period spans almost ten years, the number of class members (approximately 13,000) greatly exceeds the jobs available even in the absence of discrimination (386). The subjective nature of the hiring criteria as employed by untrained interviewers, formed the factual basis for the liability opinion. 570 F.Supp. at 260, 269. Hence it is not practical to attempt to identify which members of the plaintiff class would have been hired but for the defendant's race discrimination.
8. Because the calculation of damages on an individual basis is not a feasible way to proceed, the parties have stipulated that damages should be calculated and distributed on a class-wide basis. (Ex. P-200 at 1). This approach has been adopted by other courts. See, e.g., Hameed v. International Ass'n of Bridge Workers, Local 396, 637 F.2d 506 (8th Cir.1980); Stewart v. General Motors Corp., 542 F.2d 445, 452 (7th Cir.1976), cert. denied, 433 U.S. 919, 97 S.Ct. 2995, 53 L.Ed.2d 1105 (1977); Pettway v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 494 F.2d 211, 261 (5th Cir.1974) ().
9. The basic approach used to measure the plaintiffs' damages has been to ascertain how many class members would have been hired in each liability period in the absence of discrimination (the Black Hiring Shortfall); compute the value of wages and fringe benefits those persons would have received each year from USS; and determine the amounts of wages and fringe benefits those persons could be expected to have earned each year at other jobs after not being hired by USS. The annual excess of USS wages and fringe benefits over outside wages and fringe benefits is the net damages lost that year.
10. There are five liability periods; July-December 1972, and all of 1973, 1974, 1978 and 1979. 570 F.Supp. at 257, 263. Damages are calculated separately for each group of blacks who should have been hired during each liability period (i.e., for each of the five "year class" cohorts), and for each such cohort to make damages calculations on a yearly basis, commencing with the year they should have been hired through the end of 1985. (Ex. P-200).
11. There were hiring shortfalls for permanent jobs in all five liability periods. Summer hiring shortfalls occurred in 1972 and 1973.
12. The annual shortfall figures were obtained by subtracting the actual number of blacks hired by USS as P & M employees in each liability period from...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Taylor v. Cent. Pa. Drug & Alcohol Serv. Corp.
...interest on back pay interest in Title VII case awarded using IRS rates and compounded quarterly); Green v. United States Steel Corp., 640 F.Supp. 1521, 1549 (E.D.Pa.1986), vacated in part on other grounds, 843 F.2d 1511 (3d Cir.1988), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 814, 111 S.Ct. 53, 112 L.Ed.2d 2......
-
Berger v. Iron Workers Reinforced Rodmen, Local 201
...group is a favored method of determining what would have happened absent discrimination. See also Green v. United States Steel Corp., 640 F.Supp. 1521, 1526-29 (E.D.Pa.1986) (calculating damages based on comparable class, and adjusting cohort class for attrition rate), modified on other gro......
-
Green v. USX Corp.
...class in the amount of $12,397,928, which represented mitigated back pay and fringe benefits only. Green v. United States Steel Corp., 640 F.Supp. 1521, 1548 (E.D.Pa.1986) ("Damages Opinion") (p 268), reprinted in Joint Appendix ("Jt.App.") at 179. The district court also awarded "prejudgme......
-
Long v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 86 C 7521.
...decisions affecting other claimants), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1115, 105 S.Ct. 2357, 86 L.Ed.2d 258 (1985); Green v. United States Steel Corp., 640 F.Supp. 1521, 1539 (E.D. Pa.1986) (in Title VII case, it was "appropriate to address mitigation by estimating outside wages on a class-wide basis......