TimesLeader.com

September 30, 2008

Judge rules gender discrimination suit should continue

Schott North America wanted suit filed by six women after layoff in Duryea dismissed.

By Terrie Morgan-Besecker tmorgan@timesleader.com
Law & Order Reporter

SCRANTON – A federal judge has denied a motion filed by glass manufacturer Schott North America that sought the dismissal of a gender discrimination suit filed by six women who were laid off in 2004.

U.S. District Judge James M. Munley on Monday said the women had presented sufficient evidence to support their claims that a rating system the company employed in determining which workers would keep their jobs was biased in favor of males.

The suit, filed in 2006, alleges the rating system placed an improper amount of weight on skills utilized in jobs that were primarily held by men, compared to jobs that were held by women. That allowed men to score higher, resulting in more men than women retaining their jobs after a layoff at the company’s Duryea plant in October 2004, the suit says.

According to the suit:

Production workers at the plant were divided into two sections: “hot end” workers, who operated machines that produced glass, and “cold end” workers, who inspected the glass for defects and provided other finishing services. More than 95 percent of the hot end jobs were held by males, while roughly 76 percent of cold end jobs were held by females.

In 2004, Schott decided to cease production of a certain type of glass at the Duryea plant. That led to a layoff and the creation of a new position that combined the duties of hot end and cold end jobs. To determine which workers would get the new positions, the company devised a rating system that assigned a numeric score to certain job skills.

The lawsuit alleged that system was heavily weighted in favor of skills developed by hot end workers, even though the new position required a combination of skills used in both positions.

According to court documents, one-third of the 73 workers who were evaluated were female, but only two of the 36 positions that were created were awarded to women.

Schott claimed the hot end tasks were more difficult, thus it was proper to give those skills more weight. The plaintiffs maintained the cold end jobs were equally difficult. They alleged the matrix was a ruse designed to ensure more men than women would get the jobs.

In a 35-page ruling, Munley said the women had presented evidence that the rating system did not rate skills required for the job, but instead valued the skills that men were more likely to have than women.

Munley noted testimony by females who said there was a long-standing, hostile atmosphere toward women in the plant. Some had testified they were subjected to sexual harassment and were often belittled by male counterparts.

The suit was filed by the Equal Opportunity Commission on behalf of six women, who are represented privately by attorney Peter Winebrake of Philadelphia and Sean McDonough of Moosic.

Officials from Schott did not immediately return a phone message left at the Duryea plant late Monday afternoon.