Case: EEOC v. BELL ATLANTIC CORPORATION

1:99-cv-05197 | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Filed Date: July 16, 1999

Closed Date: Oct. 10, 2002

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case involves three related cases: 1:99-cv-05197; 1:98-cv-03427; and 1:97-cv-06723. On September 7, 1997, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), on behalf of female employees, filed a lawsuit in the Southern District Court of New York, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, against predecessor companies of Verizon. The EEOC sought injunctive relief and monetary damages, alleging that the defendants failed to provide Ser…

This case involves three related cases: 1:99-cv-05197; 1:98-cv-03427; and 1:97-cv-06723.

On September 7, 1997, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), on behalf of female employees, filed a lawsuit in the Southern District Court of New York, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, against predecessor companies of Verizon. The EEOC sought injunctive relief and monetary damages, alleging that the defendants failed to provide Service Credits for periods of pregnancy-related or maternity-related leaves taken prior to April 29, 1979, which resulted in denied pension benefits to non-management female employees under an early retirement incentive program, which became effective on April 3, 1994. On January 28, 1998, the District Court (Judge Denny Chin), granted the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers ("IBEW") and Communications Workers of America ("CWA")'s motions to intervene.

On May 14, 1998, the IBEW, on behalf of female employees, filed a lawsuit in the Southern District Court of New York, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, against the same defendants as above. IBEW sought injunctive relief and monetary damages, alleging that the defendants failed to provide female employees Service Credits for periods of approved leaves of absence for Care of Newborn Children taken prior to January 1, 1984, while granting Service Credit to male employees who took similar kinds of leave, resulting in the eventual denial of the same pension benefits listed above to non-management female employees.

The present case started on July 16, 1999, when the EEOC, on behalf of female employees, filed a lawsuit in the Southern District Court of New York, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Pay Act, against the same defendants as above. The EEOC sought injunctive relief and monetary damages, claiming that the defendants' method for calculating eligibility for and benefits of a Cash Balance Plan did not include the full Service Credit for female management employees who took Pregnancy-related or Maternity-Related leaves, and yet did include the full Service Credit to other employees who took similar kinds of leave.

On May 20, 1998, case 1:98-cv-03427 was related to case 1:97-cv-06723. Then, on October 22, 1999, case 1:99-cv-05197 (this case) was related to 1:97-cv-06723.

After going through the discovery process and several settlement conferences, the parties reached a settlement on February 28, 2002. After a fairness hearing was held, the District Court (Judge Denny Chin) approved the consent decree on October 9, 2002. Among other things, the defendants agreed to give the members of the class additional service credit which would, in turn, give them increased monthly pension payments and also make them eligible for the early retirement program. Those who have already retired and have been receiving pension payments will receive the difference between the current amount and the amount they should've been paid. The total cost to the defendants was estimated to be in the millions. The defendants also agreed to pay the plaintiff-intervenors' reasonable attorneys' fees and costs.

Summary Authors

Perry Miska (4/13/2014)

People


Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Bissell, Katherine (New York)

Chin, Denny (New York)

Grossman, Elizabeth (New York)

Lee, James L. (District of Columbia)

Quinto, Luis (New York)

Reams, Gwendolyn Young (District of Columbia)

Stewart, C. Gregory (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Dichter, Mark S. (Pennsylvania)

Other Attorney(s)

Active

Active

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Bissell, Katherine (New York)

Chin, Denny (New York)

Grossman, Elizabeth (New York)

Lee, James L. (District of Columbia)

Quinto, Luis (New York)

Reams, Gwendolyn Young (District of Columbia)

Stewart, C. Gregory (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Dichter, Mark S. (Pennsylvania)

Other Attorney(s)

Mintz, David A. (New York)

O'melveny, Mary K. (District of Columbia)

Semel, Gabrielle (New York)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:99-cv-05197

Docket

EEOC v. Bell Atlantic Corp.

Jan. 13, 2003

Jan. 13, 2003

Docket

1:99-cv-05197

1:97-cv-06723

1:98-cv-03427

Consent Decree

EEOC v. Bell Atlantic

Feb. 25, 2002

Feb. 25, 2002

Settlement Agreement

1:99-cv-05197

EEOC and Verizon Settle Pregnancy Bias Suit; Thousands of Women to Receive Benefits

EEOC v. Bell Atlantic

No Court

Feb. 26, 2002

Feb. 26, 2002

Press Release

1:99-cv-05197

1:97-cv-06723

1:98-cv-03427

Memorandum Decision

EEOC v. Bell Atlantic Corp.

2002 WL 31260290, 2002 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 19156

Oct. 9, 2002

Oct. 9, 2002

Order/Opinion

1:99-cv-05197

FY 2002 Office of General Counsel Annual Report

EEOC v. Bell Atlantic Corp

No Court

Dec. 31, 2003

Dec. 31, 2003

Press Release

Resources

Docket

Last updated July 19, 2022, 3:16 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT filed; Summons issued and Notice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c); (No Fees Due − U.S.A.). (em) (Entered: 07/19/1999)

July 16, 1999

July 16, 1999

Magistrate Judge Kevin M. Fox is so Designated. (em) (Entered: 07/19/1999)

July 16, 1999

July 16, 1999

2

NOTICE OF MOTION by Bell Atlantic Corp., NYNEX Corporation, New York Telephone, Empire City Subway, New England Tel., Telesector Resources, NYNEX Information, NYNEX Mobile Comm., Bell Atlantic Mobile to dismiss the claim of pltff in its entirety . Return date 9/17/99. (lam) (Entered: 09/20/1999)

Sept. 17, 1999

Sept. 17, 1999

3

MEMORANDUM by Bell Atlantic Corp., NYNEX Corporation, New York Telephone, Empire City Subway, New England Tel., Telesector Resources, NYNEX Information, NYNEX Mobile Comm., Bell Atlantic Mobile in support of [2−1] motion to dismiss the claim of pltff in its entirety (lam) (Entered: 09/20/1999)

Sept. 17, 1999

Sept. 17, 1999

4

AFFIDAVIT of Christopher A. Parlo, atty for Bell Atlantic Corp., NYNEX Corporation, New York Telephone, Empire City Subway, New England Tel., Telesector Resources, NYNEX Information, NYNEX Mobile Comm., Bell Atlantic Mobile in support Re: [2−1] motion to dismiss the claim of pltff in its entirety . (lam) (Entered: 09/20/1999)

Sept. 17, 1999

Sept. 17, 1999

5

MEMORANDUM &ORDER, this case involves similar parties and legal issues as EEOC v. Bell Atlantic Corp. et al., 97 Civ. 6723 (DC). Therefore, with Judge Chin's consent, we hereby transfer the instant case to him as a related case ( signed by Judge Whitman Knapp ); Copies mailed. (Sent copy of document to Case

Oct. 20, 1999

Oct. 20, 1999

Case accepted as related to 1:97cv 6723. Notice of assignment to follow. (bm) (Entered: 11/03/1999)

Oct. 22, 1999

Oct. 22, 1999

7

Memo−Endorsement on letter addressed to Judge Chin from Adela P. Santos, dated 12/13/99; granting counsel for the pltff's request for an extension of time, until 12/22/99 to file its opposition to defts [2−1] motion to dismiss the claim of pltff in its entirety ; also granting the request that the defts reply to the [2−1] motion be extended to 1/19/00 . ( signed by Judge Denny Chin ); Copies mailed. (jp) Modified on 12/20/1999 (Entered: 12/16/1999)

Dec. 15, 1999

Dec. 15, 1999

8

MEMORANDUM OF LAW by E.E.O.C. in opposition to [2−1] motion to dismiss the claim of pltff in its entirety (pl) (Entered: 12/28/1999)

Dec. 27, 1999

Dec. 27, 1999

9

Memo−Endorsement on letter addressed to Judge Chin from Christopher A. Parlo, dated 1/6/00; defendants reply to to motion reset to 1/26/00 for [2−1] motion to dismiss the claim of pltff in its entirety . ( signed by Judge Denny Chin ); Copies mailed. (pl) (Entered: 01/12/2000)

Jan. 11, 2000

Jan. 11, 2000

10

Memo−Endorsement on copy of letter addressed to Judge Chin from Christopher A. Parlo, dated 01/26/00; defendant's Reply to Response to Motion reset to 1/31/00 for [2−1] motion to dismiss the claim of pltff in its entirety . (signed by Judge Denny Chin); Copies mailed. (djc) (Entered: 01/31/2000)

Jan. 28, 2000

Jan. 28, 2000

11

REPLY MEMORANDUM by Bell Atlantic Corp., NYNEX Corporation, New York Telephone, Empire City Subway, New England Tel., Telesector Resources, NYNEX Information, NYNEX Mobile Comm., Bell Atlantic Mobile re: [2−1] motion to dismiss the claim of pltff in its entirety (cd) (Entered: 02/01/2000)

Jan. 31, 2000

Jan. 31, 2000

12

Memo−Endorsement on letter addressed to Judge Chin from Adela P. Santos, dated 2/2/00. Re: EEOC requests that it be allowed until 2/29/00 to file a response to defts' Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of their Motion to Dismiss this case; Application Denied. If the Court wants a surreply, it will request one ; ( signed by Judge Denny Chin ); copies mailed (ls) (Entered: 02/04/2000)

Feb. 4, 2000

Feb. 4, 2000

Order that case be referred to the Clerk of Court for assignment to a Magistrate Judge for settlement ( signed by Judge Denny Chin ) Referred to Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz. (Original document filed under 97 cv 6723 as Doc. #50) (sn) (Entered: 03/22/2000)

March 21, 2000

March 21, 2000

13

Order that case be referred to the Clerk of Court for assignment to a Magistrate Judge for Settlement. ( signed by Judge Denny Chin ) Referred to Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz . (jp) (Entered: 04/19/2000)

April 18, 2000

April 18, 2000

Settlement Conference held before Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz. (jp) (Entered: 06/05/2000)

May 31, 2000

May 31, 2000

Memo−Endorsement on letter addressed to Judge Chin from Christopher A. Parlo, dated 5/25/00; granting counsel for the parties request for a brief extension of discovery, until 7/31/00 . ( signed by Judge Denny Chin ); Copies mailed. Original document filed under case number 97 cv 6723, document number 51. (jp) (Entered: 06/02/2000)

June 1, 2000

June 1, 2000

Settlement Conference held before Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz . (jp) (Entered: 06/09/2000)

June 6, 2000

June 6, 2000

Settlement Conference set on 10:30 a.m. on 6/19/00 before Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz. (jp) (Entered: 06/09/2000)

June 6, 2000

June 6, 2000

Settlement Telephone Conference held before Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz. (lf) (Entered: 06/23/2000)

June 19, 2000

June 19, 2000

Settlement Conference held before Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz. (lf) (Entered: 06/30/2000)

June 27, 2000

June 27, 2000

15

Memo endorsed on defendants' motion to dismiss (duplicate original); Motion denied by order dated 07/19/00 ; (signed by Judge Denny Chin); Copies mailed. (djc) Modified on 07/24/2000 (Entered: 07/24/2000)

July 24, 2000

July 24, 2000

Settlement Conference held before Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz. (lf) (Entered: 10/30/2000)

Oct. 26, 2000

Oct. 26, 2000

Settlement Conference (Telephone) held before Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz. (lf) (Entered: 11/20/2000)

Nov. 16, 2000

Nov. 16, 2000

Settlement Conference held before Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz. (jp) (Entered: 12/21/2000)

Dec. 19, 2000

Dec. 19, 2000

ORDER, by 12:00 pm on 5/23/01, the parties shall provide the Court with a summary of any issues still outstanding in the settlement discussions ; set settlement conference for 3:30 5/24/01; the parties must come with authority to settle any unresolved issues ( signed by Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz ); Copies mailed. (orig doc. filed in related case #07cv6723, doc. #55) (lam) (Entered: 05/21/2001)

May 17, 2001

May 17, 2001

Settlement Conference held before Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz. (sac) (Entered: 05/31/2001)

May 24, 2001

May 24, 2001

Settlement Conference held before Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz . (cd) (Entered: 06/11/2001)

June 6, 2001

June 6, 2001

Settlement (Telephone) Conference held before Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz. (sac) (Entered: 06/11/2001)

June 6, 2001

June 6, 2001

CONSENT DECREE/ORDER, regarding the terms of the settlement between the parties ; the fairness hearing is scheduled for 9/13/02 at 9:30 a.m. ( signed by Judge Denny Chin ); Copies mailed. (Original entry is docketed in 97 civ. 6723 as doc. #59). (kw) (Entered: 03/04/2002)

Feb. 28, 2002

Feb. 28, 2002

AFFIDAVIT of Adela Santos by E.E.O.C. in support of the fairness of the consent decree and fianl approval of the proposed settlement. Original document filed in case #97cv6723, document #64. (dle) (Entered: 09/16/2002)

Sept. 10, 2002

Sept. 10, 2002

MEMORANDUM DECISION, that looking at all the factors and taking into consideration the objections and the process through which this settlement was obtained, the Court finds that this settlement on balance meets all the criteria for approval. As I find that this is a fair, adequate, and reasonable settlement of these cases, the settlement is approved. Judgment will be entered accordingly. The cases shall be closed . ( signed by Judge Denny Chin ); FORWARDED DOCUMENT TO JUDGMENT CLERK. Original entered in case #97cv6723(DC), doc. #71. (tp) (Entered: 10/11/2002)

Oct. 9, 2002

Oct. 9, 2002

ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT APPROVING SETTLEMENT; To the extent defined in the Consent Decree dated 2/28/02, the terms in this order shall have the meanings set forth therein; the notice of proposed settlement, consent decree and fairness hearing having been duly mailed to the putative class members and additional publication notice having been given in the publications titled "Verizon and You" and "Eyes on You" the court determines that due and adequate notice of the proposed settlement has been provided to the class members, and that full opportunity has been given to the class members to participate in the fairness hearing on 9/13/02; the consent decree and the terms of the settlement as described in the consent decree are approved and confirmed as being fair, reasonable and adequate to all class members. The parties are hereby directed to proceed with and to implement the consent decree in accordance with its terms as further set forth in this order; the Court shall retain jurisdiction of this matter for the purposes of effectuating and supervising the enforcement, interpretation and implementation of the consent decree and the terms of this order and final judgment approving settlement, including entry of such further orders as may be necessary and appropriate. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter this order as a final judgment pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(2) dismissing this action with prejudice. ( signed by Judge Denny Chin ); Mailed copies and notice of right to appeal. Entered On Docket: 10/21/02. Original document filed in case #97cv6723, document #73. (dle) Modified on 10/22/2002 (Entered: 10/21/2002)

Oct. 10, 2002

Oct. 10, 2002

Case closed. (dle) (Entered: 10/21/2002)

Oct. 10, 2002

Oct. 10, 2002

Received returned mail re: [0−1] judgment order . Mail was addressed to James L. Lee at 7 World Trade Center and was returned for the following reason(s): not deliverable as addressed. (gmo) (Entered: 01/13/2003)

Jan. 13, 2003

Jan. 13, 2003

Received returned mail re: [0−0] case terminate . Mail was addressed to Elizabeth A. Grossman at 7 World Trade Center and was returned for the following reason(s): undeliverable. (gmo) (Entered: 01/13/2003)

Jan. 13, 2003

Jan. 13, 2003

Received returned mail re: [0−1] judgment order . Mail was addressed to Luis Quinto at 7 World Trade Center and was returned for the following reason(s): undeliverable. (gmo) (Entered: 01/13/2003)

Jan. 13, 2003

Jan. 13, 2003

Case Details

State / Territory: New York

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

IWPR/Wage Project Consent Decree Study

Key Dates

Filing Date: July 16, 1999

Closing Date: Oct. 10, 2002

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf of female employees who alleged sex discrimination because, unlike males who took similar types of leave, the female employees did not receive a Service Credit when they took maternity-related or pregnancy-related leaves.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

EEOC Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

EEOC

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

Verizon Communications, Inc., Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Equal Pay Act, 29 U.S.C. § 206(d)

Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Monetary Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Attorneys fees

Damages

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Order Duration: 2002 - 2004

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Discrimination-area:

Accommodation / Leave

Pay / Benefits

Discrimination-basis:

Pregnancy discrimination

Sex discrimination

Affected Gender:

Female

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits

Private Party intervened in EEOC suit

Private Suit Related / Consolidated with EEOC Suit