Filed Date: April 6, 1984
Closed Date: Jan. 19, 1994
Clearinghouse coding complete
In April of 1984 plaintiffs filed suit against Johnson Controls Inc., their employer, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin alleging sex and pregnancy discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as modified by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. The suit concerned a 1982 policy the defendant had adopted that forbade all women, unless it was medically documented that the employee was infertile, from performing jobs that could possibly expose them to lead and cause birth defects. The plaintiffs alleged that this disparate treatment of female employees resulted in discrimination regarding hiring, pay, work conditions, seniority, layoffs, training, benefits, recruiting, demotions and advancement. It was additionally alleged that the policy discriminated against male employees who sought to be transferred or given a leave of absence when attempting to conceive but were not allowed to do so. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief and damages.
On February 25, 1985 the district court (Judge Robert W. Warren) certified a class containing all past, present, and future members of the plaintiff unions who had worked, did work, or would work in the battery manufacturing division from 1982. On January 21, 1988 the court (Judge Warren) granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment holding that the plaintiffs had not shown that there was a better alternative to the policy that would protect against the serious dangers exposures to lead can cause to fetuses and thus that the policy was a business necessity.
Plaintiffs appealed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and on September 26, 1989 the court (Judges Bauer, Cummings, Wood Jr., Cudahy, Posner, Coffey, Flaum, Easterbrook, Ripple, Manion, and Kanne) affirmed the district court seven to four. The Plaintiffs thereafter appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States and were granted a writ of certiorari. Oral arguments were heard on October 10, 1990 and on March 20, 1991 the Supreme Court (Justices Blackmun, Marshall, Stevens, O'Connor, Souter, White, Rehnquist, Kennedy, and Scalia) unanimously reversed. The Supreme Court ruled that the policy in question violated Title VII since it was facially discriminatory and gender was not a bona fide occupational qualification in this case. Decisions regarding the welfare of future generations were the province of parents and so long as the defendant did not act negligently it would not be liable in tort.
The case was remanded to the district court and on January 19, 1994 the parties entered into a consent decree and settlement forbidding the discrimination in question and awarding the plaintiff class monetary damages reported to be in the high six figures.
Summary Authors
Michael Perry (9/24/2010)
Bauer, William Joseph (Illinois)
Blackmun, Harry Andrew (District of Columbia)
Coffey, John Louis (Wisconsin)
Berzon, Marsha Siegel (California)
Clauss, Carin Ann (Wisconsin)
Bauer, William Joseph (Illinois)
Blackmun, Harry Andrew (District of Columbia)
Coffey, John Louis (Wisconsin)
Cudahy, Richard Dickson (Illinois)
Cummings, Jeffrey Irvine (Illinois)
Easterbrook, Frank Hoover (Illinois)
Kanne, Michael Stephen (Indiana)
Kennedy, Anthony McLeod (District of Columbia)
Manion, Daniel Anthony (Indiana)
Marshall, Thurgood (District of Columbia)
O'Connor, Sandra Day (District of Columbia)
Posner, Richard Allen (Illinois)
Rehnquist, William Hubbs (District of Columbia)
Ripple, Kenneth Francis (Indiana)
Scalia, Antonin (District of Columbia)
Souter, David Hackett (District of Columbia)
Stevens, John Paul (District of Columbia)
Warren, Robert Willis (Wisconsin)
Last updated March 24, 2024, 3:03 a.m.
State / Territory: Wisconsin
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Private Employment Class Actions
Key Dates
Filing Date: April 6, 1984
Closing Date: Jan. 19, 1994
Case Ongoing: No
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
All past, present, and future production and maintenance employees in bargaining units represented by Intl. Union, United Automobile, Aero and Agri Implement Workers of America, who were affected by the defendant's Fetal Protection Policy.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: Yes
Class Action Outcome: Granted
Defendants
Johnson Controls, Inc. (Milwaukee, Milwaukee), Private Entity/Person
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
Available Documents:
U.S. Supreme Court merits opinion
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff
Nature of Relief:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief:
Form of Settlement:
Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Content of Injunction:
Amount Defendant Pays: High six figures
Issues
Discrimination Area:
Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc.)
Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff
Harassment / Hostile Work Environment
Discrimination Basis:
Affected Sex/Gender(s):