Filed Date: Jan. 26, 2023
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
This is a case regarding equal employment and gender discrimination. On January 26th, 2023, the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) sued the State of Wisconsin on behalf of a former employee of the Wisconsin Department of Military Affairs (“WDMA”) in the U.S. District Court for Western District of Wisconsin. Represented by the DOJ, the plaintiff alleged discrimination on the basis of sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. She claimed that the WDMA hired a less qualified male applicant for a position at a higher salary than was offered to the plaintiff for the same position. Prior to the lawsuit, the plaintiff filed a charge with the EEOC (“Equal Employment Opportunity Commission”), the details of which are unknown to the Clearinghouse. When a voluntary attempt at conciliation was unsuccessful the EEOC referred the case to the DOJ. Plaintiff sought injunctive relief, including requiring Wisconsin to institute non-discrimination policies, practices, and programs at the WDMA, lost employment wages and benefits including prejudgement interest, compensatory damages, attorneys' fees, and any other relief seen fit by the court to grant.
Plaintiff began working at WDMA in 2012 where she received exemplary feedback during her tenure, and was promoted from Northeast Region Director to Response Section Supervisor at the Wisconsin Division of Emergency Management (“WEM”). In late 2016, she applied for what would have been a one step promotion to Director, the selection panel recommended her to the hiring official, and the official agreed to hire her. The Hiring Supervisor recommended a salary on par with a parallel Director position at the WDMA, as had been the practice in years past, both at initial hiring and over time.
The hiring official authorized a salary 11% less than that of the parallel Director position, and lower than the lowest end of the job listing range. After some negotiation the hiring official’s final offer was on the low end of the salary range–10% less than the male Director in the parallel position was paid, and plaintiff refused the offer.
A second round of hiring was announced with an expanded salary range, and former applicants were told they would be reconsidered for the position. The hiring official refused to consider the Plaintiff for the position, however, and three male candidates were chosen as top candidates, including a candidate who had been lower ranked in the first hiring round. Both he and another male candidate were offered the position at a salary on par with the parallel male Director’s salary, and both refused. The third candidate was offered a fractionally lower salary–~8% higher than the salary offered to H, and he accepted. This candidate held a lower ranked position, a lower prior salary, and less relevant experience. The plaintiff had extensive experience in the area, and was the supervisors preferred candidate.
The plaintiff resigned her employment in September, 2017.
On March 16, 2023, the individual plaintiff filed as intervenor, as authorized under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. She joined the United States in their case on her behalf citing the same allegations and the same prayer for relief.
As of April, 2023, the case is ongoing.
Summary Authors
Nina Charap (2/19/2023)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66761509/parties/united-states-v-state-of-wisconsin-department-of-military-affairs/
Conley, William Martin (Wisconsin)
Ruiz, Hector Federico (Wisconsin)
Stasco, Patricia (Wisconsin)
Conley, William Martin (Wisconsin)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66761509/united-states-v-state-of-wisconsin-department-of-military-affairs/
Last updated March 10, 2024, 4:02 a.m.
State / Territory: Wisconsin
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: Jan. 26, 2023
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
A former employee of the Wisconsin Department of Military Affairs who was offered less a lower salary for a promotion than similarly qualified and less qualified male candidates.
Plaintiff Type(s):
U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff
Attorney Organizations:
U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Nature of Relief:
Source of Relief:
Issues
General:
Discrimination-area:
Discrimination-basis:
Affected Sex or Gender: