Judge Denies Settlement Motion in PGW Age Discrimination Suit
December 12, 2012

by Penny Stacey, pstacey@glass.com

A Pennsylvania judge has denied a motion for a settlement conference by several former Pittsburgh Glass Works (PGW) employees who are claiming age discrimination in an ongoing class action suit, filed two years ago in the U.S. District Court for the District of Western Pennsylvania.

The plaintiffs had claimed in their motion for a settlement conference that it is necessary “for various reasons, to hold a settlement conference on an expedited basis.” They had hoped to settle the case by the end of this year, citing the fact that it was filed more than two years ago—on September 29, 2010.

While plaintiffs in the case also had advised the court that they have engaged in discussions about a settlement conference with PGW officials and that PGW is resistant to a settlement conference “for reasons that have not been articulated,” the judge notes in his denial that PGW disputes having had such discussions.

Additionally, nine opt-in plaintiffs have joined the case and PGW has not yet had the opportunity to obtain depositions from two of them. “A court-sanctioned settlement conference may be more beneficial after all plaintiffs have at least been initially deposed,” writes the judge.

The class action suit was filed by a number of former employees who allege they were let go during a March 2009 reduction-in-force due to their age. The five named plaintiffs are Rudolph Karlo, Mark McLure, William Cunningham, Jeffrey Marietti, David Meixelsberger, Benjamin Thompson and Richard Csukas. The plaintiffs, who are all between the ages of 52 and 58, were let go at the end of March 2009, when the company laid off a number of employees as part of a company reorganization.

The plaintiffs claim that PGW “adopt[ed] and employ[ed] methods for evaluating, ranking and selecting employees for termination in its [reductions-in-force], which methods were highly subjective, unreliable, invalid, and served as mere pretext, resulting in the termination of disproportionately high numbers of older workers who were never informed of the clandestine criteria used to select them for termination.”

Stay tuned to www.glassBYTEs.com™ for more information on the case as it becomes available.

This story is an original story by AGRR™ magazine/glassBYTEs.com™. Subscribe to AGRR™ Magazine.
Subscribe to receive the free e-newsletter.