Case: EEOC v. U.S. Aluminum

3:06-cv-03801 | U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey

Filed Date: Aug. 11, 2006

Closed Date: Sept. 10, 2008

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

The New York District Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission brought this suit against U.S. Aluminum, Inc., United States Bronze Powders, Inc., and UAW Local 1668 in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on August 11, 2006. The complaint alleged age discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act because the collective bargaining agreement between the employers and the union reduced severance pay for employees over 60 years old who were en…

The New York District Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission brought this suit against U.S. Aluminum, Inc., United States Bronze Powders, Inc., and UAW Local 1668 in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on August 11, 2006. The complaint alleged age discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act because the collective bargaining agreement between the employers and the union reduced severance pay for employees over 60 years old who were entitled to pensions. Employees over 65 years who were entitled to pensions received no severance pay at all. The EEOC sought injunctive relief and damages for the charging parties, two employees over the age of 60 who received reduced severance pay after the plant where they worked shut down. The case was assigned to Judge Mary L. Cooper.

The first complaint that the EEOC filed listed only the union and U.S. Aluminum, Inc. as defendant. On May 29, 2007, the EEOC filed its last amended complaint, which named all three defendants.

In late October 2007, all three defendants moved for summary judgment. They did not dispute any of the EEOC’s factual allegations, but they did dispute that their conduct had violated the ADEA. On December 3, the EEOC made a cross motion for summary judgment.

On May 27, 2008, the court granted the defendants’ motions for summary judgment, denied the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, and entered judgment in favor of the defendants. The court held that reducing severance pay for employees who are entitled to a pension did not violate the ADEA because the statute explicitly allowed for the coordination of severance pay and pension benefits in certain situations. 2008 WL 2224820. Reasoning that severance pay and pension benefits serve largely the same purpose (to provide a bridge to the newly unemployed person's next pursuit, either a new job or retirement), the court held that the agreement between the employers and the union was fair. No relief was awarded to any party.

The EEOC appealed this case to the Third Circuit but voluntarily dismissed it on September 10, 2008. (Docket Number: 08-03253). The docket ends after this date; the case is presumably closed.

Summary Authors

Kevin Wilemon (5/29/2008)

Rebecca Strauss (5/22/2018)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5742971/parties/equal-employment-opportunity-commission-v-us-aluminum-inc/


Judge(s)

Bongiovanni, Tonianne J. (New Jersey)

Cooper, Mary Little (New Jersey)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Batog, Konrad (New York)

Grossman, Elizabeth (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Angelillo, Robert Charles (New York)

Castello, Geoffrey W. III (New Jersey)

Mazzuchetti, Lauri A. (New Jersey)

McGovern, Robert T. (New York)

Judge(s)

Bongiovanni, Tonianne J. (New Jersey)

Cooper, Mary Little (New Jersey)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Batog, Konrad (New York)

Grossman, Elizabeth (New York)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Angelillo, Robert Charles (New York)

Castello, Geoffrey W. III (New Jersey)

Mazzuchetti, Lauri A. (New Jersey)

McGovern, Robert T. (New York)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket (PACER)

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. U.S. Aluminum

Sept. 10, 2008 Docket
1

Complaint

Aug. 11, 2006 Complaint
3

Amended Complaint

Oct. 17, 2006 Complaint
16

Second Amended Complaint

May 29, 2007 Complaint
47

Memorandum Opinion

EEOC v. U.S. Aluminum, INC.

2008 WL 2224820

May 27, 2008 Order/Opinion

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5742971/equal-employment-opportunity-commission-v-us-aluminum-inc/

Last updated May 12, 2022, 8 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
47

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Mary L. Cooper on 5/23/08. (lk)

May 27, 2008 RECAP

State / Territory: New Jersey

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Key Dates

Filing Date: Aug. 11, 2006

Closing Date: Sept. 10, 2008

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf two 63-year-old former employees who received reduced severance pay because they qualified for a pension

Plaintiff Type(s):

EEOC Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

EEOC

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

United States Bronze Powders, Inc. (Haskell and Flemington, NJ), Private Entity/Person

U.S. Aluminum, Inc. (Haskell and Flemington, NJ), Private Entity/Person

United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America Local 1668, Union

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 et seq.

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Non-settlement Outcome

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Discrimination-area:

Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff

Pay / Benefits

Discrimination-basis:

Age discrimination

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits