Inglis v. Buena Vista University
| Decision Date | 16 December 2002 |
| Docket Number | No. C00-4150-MWB.,C00-4150-MWB. |
| Citation | 235 F.Supp.2d 1009 |
| Parties | Laura INGLIS, Susanne Gubanc, Nadine Brewer, Hollace Drake, Robbie Ludy, and Ann Petersen, Plaintiffs, v. BUENA VISTA UNIVERSITY, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa |
Tiffany Basantz Klosener, Roxanne Conlin & Associates, Des Moines, IA, for plaintiff.
Gary W. Armstrong, Mack, Hansen, Gadd, Armstrong & Brown, PC, Storm Lake, IA, Daniel Wilczek, Kristen M. Ludgate, Faegre & Benson, Minneapolis, MN, for defendant.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. BACKGROUND .......................................................... 1013
II. DISCUSSION .......................................................... 1015
A. Summary Judgment Standards ....................................... 1015
1. Requirements of Rule 56 ....................................... 1015
2. The parties' burdens .......................................... 1016
3. Summary judgment in employment discrimination cases ........... 1016
B. Are the Plaintiffs' Claims Time-Barred? .......................... 1018
1. Pay claims prior to Morgan .................................... 1020
2. The Morgan decision ........................................... 1022
3. Application of Morgan to pay claims ........................... 1024
C. Motion to Substitute ............................................. 1029
III. CONCLUSION .......................................................... 1030
This matter comes before the court on the defendant's Motion For Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 38), filed September 1, 2002. The plaintiffs resisted the defendant's motion on October 16, 2002, and the court heard oral argument on December 3, 2002. At this hearing, the plaintiffs were represented by Tiffany Basantz Klosener of Roxanne Conlin & Associates, Des Moines, Iowa, and the defendant was represented by Daniel Wilczek, of Faegre & Benson, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and Gary Armstrong, of Mack, Hansen, Gadd, Armstrong, & Brown, of Storm Lake, Iowa. The lawyers were extremely well prepared and presented insightful arguments. As a result, the court invited supplemental briefing. All parties accepted this invitation. This wage discrimination case is currently set for a jury trial to begin on February 10, 2003.
The plaintiffs are professors and former professors at Buena Vista University ("BVU"). The defendant in this action, BVU, is a private university located in Storm Lake, Iowa. The plaintiffs allege that, during the course of their employment at BVU, they were paid less than similarly situated males because of their sex. The plaintiffs seek redress for the alleged wage discrimination at BVU pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., the Iowa Civil Rights Act ("ICRA"), Iowa Code § 216, and the Equal Pay Act ("EPA"), 29 U.S.C. § 255. Each plaintiff filed an administrative charge with the EEOC and Iowa Civil Rights Commission on September 1, 1999 and, upon receiving right-to-sue letters, timely commenced their law-suits on November 6, 2000.1
The following chart briefly summarizes the employment history of the plaintiffs at BVU:
Year Beginning Promotions/Year
Plaintiff Degree Hired Rank School Discipline
Associate Social Science
Laura Assistant Professor Philosophy & Religion
Inglis2 Ph.D. 1987 Professor (1991) Religion Philosophy
Promotion
Susanne Assistant or tenure Communication Mass
Gubanc Master 1994 Professor not sought & Arts Communications
Associate
Professor
(1992); Full
Nadine Assistant Professor Communication
Brewer Master 1987 Professor (1999) & Arts English
Assistant
Hollace Professor Communication
Drake Master 1985 Instructor (1987) & Arts English/Speech
Full
Robbie Associate Professor
Ludy Ph.D. 1996 Professor (2001) Education Education
Associate
Ann Assistant Professor
Petersen Ph.D. 1990 Professor (1996) Education Education
At BVU, the Vice President for Academic Affairs ("VPAA") is primarily responsible for oversight of the curriculum, faculty hiring and evaluations, tenure and promotion decisions, and the academic budget. In addition, the VPAA makes faculty compensation decisions, though these decisions are subject to BVU's president's revisions and approval. In the summer of 1997, John Mouw, Director of the Graduate School, was appointed as acting VPAA. As VPAA, Mouw prepared a statistical analysis of faculty salaries at BVU and found that some variation in salaries remained unexplained by his model, which looked to the average salary in the market, salaries at peer institutions, and experience. Mouw did not attempt to identify the source of the variations but suggested that gender and ethnicity differences should be explored further.
In 1998, BVU hired Dr. Karen Halbersleben to replace Mouw as the VPAA. Prior to Halbersleben's arrival at BVU, the university had retained the consulting firm of McGladrey & Pullen to conduct analyses of BVU's compensation practices. One of the objectives of the McGladrey study was to conduct an "open and transparent salary and administration process, which would include a review of salaries currently paid to BV faculty, and to benchmark those salaries against a defined group of peer and aspirant institutions." [Halbersleben Dep. 99, Pl.'s App., at 132]. While the McGladrey study was pending, BVU suspended all individualized pay increases to faculty members in 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001.3
As part of the McGladrey study, gender and age were included as variables. The preliminary results of the study showed that there existed a potential correlation between pay and gender at BVU, and these results were presented to the faculty in April of 1999. As a result of the troubling findings, McGladrey & Pullen performed a more in-depth faculty pay analysis that involved a multiple regression analysis of BVU's pay practices. The regression analysis ultimately indicated that gender was not a statistically significant predictor of faculty salaries. However, the findings were based, in part, on incorrect data and, therefore, are not altogether reliable. Namely, the McGladrey & Pullen firm misclassified plaintiff Ludy and another female professor as "male" faculty members, thus understating the average male faculty salary while simultaneously increasing the average female faculty salary.
Nevertheless, BVU determined that some of the salary disparities in faculty pay were unwarranted and attempted to utilize the McGladrey study results to establish market-based salary "floors." Accordingly, in July of 1999, BVU ultimately increased the salaries of 20 male and 11 female faculty members. All six plaintiffs received salary increases as a result of the implementation of these McGladrey adjustments.
Wholly apart from the McGladrey adjustments, however, plaintiffs Drake and Gubanc, as well as a third professor, David Walker, received lump sum payments. These payments were aimed at correcting past salary disparities created during Halbersleben's tenure at BVU. However, by Halbersleben's own admission, the pay adjustments were not intended to remedy nor refer to any gender issues in pay disparities. [Halbersleben Dep., 134-37; Pf.'s App., at 133]. Instead, Halbersleben determined that these payments were warranted because, since her arrival as VPAA, she had hired a new faculty member at a higher salary than the three comparable BVU incumbents. Drake received a lump sum adjustment of $14,172, and Gubanc received $13,831. As a condition of receiving the lump sum payments, the recipients, Drake, Gubanc, and Walker, were required to sign agreements, which stated that "This Agreement is intended to be a full agreement of the parties regarding salary equity issues from 1998 up to and including the date of this Agreement, and including the 1999-2000 academic year." [Deft.'s App, at 652-53].
After confronting BVU after the April of 1999 presentation of the initial McGladrey & Pullen study findings, arguing that their salaries were lower than their male counterparts and that this disparity was the result of gender discrimination, the plaintiffs filed substantially identical administrative charges against BVU, alleging that BVU discriminated against them in pay and related benefits on the basis of sex. This lawsuit followed.
In this action, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lorenzen v. Gkn Armstrong Wheels, Inc., C 03-3073-MWB.
...wage discrimination claims based on unequal pay for equal work are analyzed under Equal Pay Act Standards."); Inglis v. Buena Vista Univ., 235 F.Supp.2d 1009, 1018 (N.D.Iowa 2002) ("`Where a claim is for unequal pay for equal work based upon sex, the standards of the Equal Pay Act apply whe......
-
Parada v. Great Plains Intern. of Sioux City, Inc.
...§ 206(d)(1) (1994) and Hutchins v. Intn'l Brotherhood of Teamsters, 177 F.3d 1076, 1080-81 (8th Cir.1999)); Inglis v. Buena Vista Univ., 235 F.Supp.2d 1009, 1019 (N.D.Iowa 2002) ("Once the plaintiff has proven her prima facie case, the employer then bears the burden of coming forward with a......
-
Johnson v. McGraw-Hill Companies
...argument that the creation of a discriminatory pay structure constitutes a discrete act under Morgan. Inglis v. Buena Vista University, 235 F.Supp.2d 1009, 1020-1029 (N.D.Iowa 2002). Nevertheless, in Bazemore, the Supreme Court spoke of each week's discriminatory paycheck as constituting a ......
-
Griffiths v. Winnebago Industries, Inc., C03-3019 MWB.
...§ 206(d)(1) (1994) and Hutchins v. Intn'l Brotherhood of Teamsters, 177 F.3d 1076, 1080-81 (8th Cir.1999)); Inglis v. Buena Vista Univ., 235 F.Supp.2d 1009, 1019 (N.D.Iowa 2002) ("Once the plaintiff has proven her prima facie case, the employer then bears the burden of coming forward with a......
-
Perceiving subtle sexism: mapping the social-psychological forces and legal narratives that obscure gender bias.
...estoppel "are to be applied sparingly"). (20) 412 F.3d 1169, 1180 n.16 (11th Cir. 2005). (21) See, e.g., Inglis v. Buena Vista Univ., 235 F. Supp. 2d 1009, 1025 (N.D. Iowa 2002); Oshiver v. Levin, 38 F.3d 1380, 1386-87 (3d Cir. 1994). But see Hamilton v. First Source Bank, 928 F.2d 86, 90 (......