Jones v. Lee Way Motor Freight, Inc.
| Decision Date | 23 June 1969 |
| Docket Number | Civ. No. 68-33. |
| Citation | 300 F. Supp. 653 |
| Parties | Marcus JONES, Willie B. Hodge, Clifton Nickles and Clarence L. Irving, Plaintiffs, v. LEE WAY MOTOR FREIGHT, INC., Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Oklahoma |
E. Melvin Porter, Oklahoma City, Okl., William L. Wood, Houston, Tex., for plaintiffs.
Richard G. Taft and John B. Dudley, of McAfee, Dudley, Taft, Cates & Mark, Richard H. Champlin, Oklahoma City, Okl., for defendant.
Plaintiffs' action is based on Defendant's alleged commission of an unlawful employment practice prohibited by 42 U. S.C. § 2000e-2(a) (1) and (2) (Act). Plaintiffs, who are negroes, are employees of Defendant at Houston, Texas, as City Drivers. They allege that they sought a transfer from such job to that of Over-the-Road or Line Driver which was allegedly refused by Defendant because of their race and color. Defendant denies that the requested transfers from one job to another was refused because of race or color. It contends that the refusal was pursuant to a long established business policy of forbidding transfers between the two job classifications and that such Company policy has been consistently applied since 1957 to all employees, regardless of race or color. The case has been submitted for determination on a stipulation of facts and briefs.
Section 2000e-2, Title 42 U.S.C.A., provides in pertinent part as follows:
The facts show that the Defendant has had a Company policy since 1957 of prohibiting all transfers from City Driver to Over-the-Road Driver and vice versa and that this policy has been uniformly applied by Defendant since that time, with one exception. The exception arose because of a mistake by the Defendant's Terminal Manager at San Antonio in failing to follow the Company's published no-transfer policy. Upon learning of this violation of Company policy, the Defendant ordered that the transferred employee be transferred back but Union grievance action interceded and prevented correction of the mistake. It further appears that there have been no deviations in the application of this policy for reasons of race and the same has been applied to whites and negroes alike; that whites as well as negroes have been denied such transfers under this policy. The reasons given by Defendant for the policy is the difficulty of adjustment to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v. Lee Way Motor Freight, Inc.
...was established for "rational and bona fide considerations" and was indiscriminately applied. Relief was denied, Jones v. Lee Way Motor Freight, Inc., W.D.Okl., 300 F.Supp. 653, and this appeal followed. Jurisdiction is found under 42 U.S.C. § The company has two categories of drivers, line......
-
Bing v. Roadway Express, Inc., 30414.
...and to the said class * * *." In support of its conclusions the district court relied very heavily upon Jones v. Lee Way Motor Freight, Incorporated, 300 F.Supp. 653 (W.D.Okl.1969), a case involving a fact situation almost identical to the instant controversy. Subsequent to the district cou......
-
Frockt v. Olin Corporation, NA 69-C-57.
...particular sex employed by an employer in any particular job classification or training program. See also: Jones v. Lee Way Motor Freight, Inc., 300 F.Supp. 653, 655 (W.D.Okl., 1969); United States by Clark v. H. K. Porter Company, 296 F. Supp. 40, 69 The plaintiff's wild, uncorroborated ac......