A school district in Illinois will pay more than $200k to settle age discrimination claims based on a discriminatory collective bargaining agreement (“CBA”). The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit against Urbana School District No. 116 in Illinois (“School District”) when the School District limited the salary increases of teachers over the age of 45 based on a provision in the CBA between the School District and the teacher’s union. Designed to limit the School District’s pension obligations, the provision limited salary increases of teachers within 10 years of retirement eligibility but did not limit salary increases of younger teachers.
A federal judge ruled that the CBA provision violated the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) by limiting the compensation of teachers who are 45 and older because of their age and ordered the School District to pay lost wages to 32 teachers who the School District did not dispute had compensation limited by the CBA.
The EEOC then sought additional lost wages, including for teachers other than the 32 in the court’s decision.
However, the School District agreed to settle the matter, and will pay a total of $206,301 to 40 teachers. As part of the settlement, the School District also agreed with the union to a CBA that removed the discriminatory provision, and agreed to a three-year consent decree that prohibits the School District from limiting a teacher’s salary because of age, prohibits the School District and union from entering into an agreement that limits a teacher’s compensation based on age or proximity to retirement eligibility, prohibits the School District from retaliating against anyone who complained about age discrimination or participated in the case, requires training for those involved in collective bargaining, requires the School District to post a notice about the suit’s resolution and requires periodic reporting to the EEOC.
What this means to you:
Employers cannot rely on unlawful provisions in collective bargaining or other agreements to discriminate against employees. That means, even if a union, customer, client, vendor, or anyone else wants an agreement that somehow unlawfully discriminates against an employee based on any protected characteristic – such as age, race, gender, religion, national origin, disability, military status – the employer must say “no,” even if it means losing that customer, client, vendor.
Has your organization had recent training on discrimination? To learn about our Respectful Workplace, Managing Within the Law, or other programs, or to book a workshop, call 800-458-2778 or send us an email.
Updated 06-09-2024
Information here is correct at the time it is posted. Case decisions cited here may be reversed. Please do not rely on this information without consulting an attorney first.
