Filed Date: 1967
Closed Date: 1974
Clearinghouse coding complete
This case predates PACER, so we do not have a docket. Information from the case was found in court opinions and in documents uploaded below, which were found in the papers of Brian Landsberg.
In 1967, the United States filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The U.S. sued a company operating steel manufacturing facilities employing approximately 700 individuals in Birmingham, Alabama. The U.S. alleged that the defendant engaged in patterns and practices of racial discrimination in employment, such as classifying departments and jobs to provide higher paying jobs for white employees and failing to provide equal opportunities for advancement and promotion for black employees. The U.S. sought fees and costs and an injunction barring the defendant from:
Following the complaint, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and for failure to join parties, arguing that the complaint did not contain specific enough facts of discrimination and that the United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO, and its local union were required parties because relief couldn't be granted without affecting the unions' interests. In addition, the defendant filed a motion for a more definite statement. On July 28, 1967, Judge Seybourn H. Lynne declined to dismiss the case, but granted the defendant's motion for a more definite statement and for the joinder of the unions as defendants. Judge Lynne ordered the plaintiff to file an amended complaint.
After several discovery disputes and two pretrial conferences, the case was tried from August 12, 1968 to August 21, 1968. 296 F.Supp. 40. Throughout the trial, the parties engaged in a comprehensive and exhaustive presentation of evidence relating to the variety of positions, programs, and job classifications at the defendant company. For the majority of positions and programs, Judge Clarence W. Allgood held that the defendants implemented a pattern of equal opportunities in employment. In two areas, however—temporary assignments from the 'Extra Board' and the Roll Change Helper job classification—Judge Allgood held that discriminatory practices did exist and granted injunctive relief to eliminate this practice. According to the order, the defendant company was enjoined from giving preference to white employees over black employees when making temporary assignments to jobs from the Extra Board. In making temporary assignments, the defendant company was ordered to first call employees holding seniority and then call employees for assignments in order of their age with the company. The defendant was also ordered to transfer all Roll Changer Helpers to the Roll Changer Grade III, an essentially similar job. The court retained jurisdiction for the limited injunction and to determine attorneys' fees.
The U.S. appealed to a three-judge panel in the Fifth Circuit. On March 19, 1974, the Court held that major changes in the seniority and the defendants' other systems were required to achieve compliance with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 491 F.2d 1105. The Court directed the parties to propose a decree to bring the seniority system into compliance, and the parties submitted a proposed decree. The case was remanded and on March 22, 1974, Judge Lynne entered the decree. Under the decree, the defendants were enjoined from engaging in any acts or practices having the purpose or effect of discrimination on the basis of race. The decree included specific adjustments to the seniority system and the process for filling permanent vacancies. It limited the circumstances under which the employer may test applicants for transfers between departments and required the employer to publish the terms of the decree throughout the workplace. The court retained jurisdiction of the action for the entry of any decrees necessary to reach complete compliance with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
We do not know the history of case beyond this summary. Presumably, the case is closed.
Summary Authors
Emily Kempa (6/18/2019)
Allgood, Clarence W. (Alabama)
Bell, Griffin Boyette (Georgia)
Brown, John Robert (Louisiana)
Clark, Ramsey (District of Columbia)
Doar, John (District of Columbia)
Clark, Ramsey (District of Columbia)
Doar, John (District of Columbia)
Dunbaugh, Frank M. III (District of Columbia)
Ewald, Thomas R. (District of Columbia)
Goldsmith, Herbert A. Jr. (District of Columbia)
Norman, David L. (District of Columbia)
Pollak, Stephen J. (District of Columbia)
Last updated April 26, 2024, 3:08 a.m.
Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.State / Territory: Alabama
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Civil Rights Division Archival Collection
Key Dates
Filing Date: 1967
Closing Date: 1974
Case Ongoing: No reason to think so
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
U.S. Deptartment of Justice
Plaintiff Type(s):
U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff
Attorney Organizations:
U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO (Birmingham, AL), Union
H. K. Porter Company, Inc. (Birmingham, AL), Private Entity/Person
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
Available Documents:
Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief
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:
Follow recruitment, hiring, or promotion protocols
Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law
Implement complaint/dispute resolution process
Order Duration: 1974 - None
Issues
General/Misc.:
Discrimination Area:
Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc.)
Discrimination Basis:
Affected Race(s):