Industry Experience Includes:

Recent Counseling and Litigation Experiences Include:

• Representation of a multibillion dollar joint venture between two international consumer product companies, assisting with the process of combining and integrating their United States operations, including the labor, employment, benefits and immigration issues that arise when combining two companies’ operations (which included a unionized and a non-unionized production workforce), and developing “best practice” human resource policies nationwide, and all related issues.
  
  
• Representation of two major manufacturing clients throughout a significant corporate nationwide reorganization resulting in no discrimination charges or other type of litigation.
  
  
• Representation of numerous government contractors and subcontractors in successfully closing out affirmative action program reviews at the desk audit stage with “no action” letters from the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs.
  
  
• Successful representation of a diversified service industry/technology company in the face of numerous discrimination charges arising at one facility and development of a strategy to improve employee relations at the location to reduce the likelihood of future charges.

Representative Litigation Engagements Include:

Discrimination (including Class Action and Pattern or Practice)

• Obtained dismissal under Iqbal and Twombly of retaliation and promissory estoppel claims against multiple defendants by former employee of one of the defendants who was seeking to establish an independent contractor relationship with a different defendant. E.D. Wis. Case No. 10-C-512 (5/26/11).
  
  
• Obtained dismissal of age discrimination claim by employee with nearly 30 years of service at the company. E.D. Wis. Case No. 2:06-CV-01096-CNC (3/24/10).
  
  
• Obtained summary judgment in a discrimination claim alleging that the plaintiff had been subjected to racially discriminatory terms and conditions of employment and ultimately discharged; the plaintiff was unsuccessful in relying on allegedly racially motivated remarks and supposed racial stereotypes held by his co-workers and managers; plaintiff’s appeal to the Seventh Circuit was denied. E.D. Wis. Case No. 04-C-57; 7th Cir., No. 05-1955 (8/4/05).
  
  
• Obtained summary judgment in a claim involving a current employee alleging 12 counts of race discrimination, including discriminatory demotion, transfer, denial of pay raise, failure to prepare a performance evaluation, failure to promote, denial of bonus, false performance evaluations, and failure to mentor or advance, as well as a claim of racial harassment; plaintiff’s appeal to the Seventh Circuit was denied. E.D. Wis. Case No. 01-C-845; 7th Cir., No. 04-1521 (6/15/05).
  
  
• Obtained judgment as a matter of law, reversing a jury finding of non-willful age discrimination in connection with the removal of a long service 53-year old sales employee as part of a reorganization, based on the results of a structured interview given all employees in the sales department, even though the decision maker had assigned the three lowest scores to the three oldest incumbents. 7th Cir. Case No. 97-2831, 168 F.3d 961.
  
  
• Obtained summary judgment in a multi-plaintiff race discrimination and retaliation claim brought against a service industry employer under Title VII and Section 1981, alleging discriminatory terms and conditions of employment, race harassment and retaliation, despite allegations of numerous allegedly discriminatory, but ambiguous, remarks by the decision maker. E.D. Wis. Case No. 97-C-1188.
  
  
• Obtained summary judgment on a race discrimination claim brought against a consumer products company in connection with 26 promotions denied to the plaintiff over a 12-year period. As to the timely claims, the employer’s use of a structured panel interview system for numerous sales and marketing positions was upheld against the plaintiff’s challenge under Title VII and Section 1981. E.D. Wis. Case No. 96-C-768.
  
  
• Obtained dismissal of purported class claims of age discrimination and violation of ERISA involving hundreds of employees terminated following a merger of two major manufacturers. E.D. Wis. Case Nos. 89-C-1211, 1992 WL 430673, and E.D. Wis. Case No. 91-C-1063 and 7th Cir. Case No. 95-3335, 99 F.3d 846.
  
  
• Obtained dismissal of pattern and practice race discrimination allegations pre-trial and obtain a directed verdict at the end of the EEOC’s case alleging failure to promote a long service supervisor, with four of the five days of trial being spent on the cross-examination of the former supervisor and putting in the employer’s case through the plant manager and assistant plant manager who were called adversely by the EEOC. E.D. Wis. Case No. 81-C-578, 650 F. Supp. 739.

OFCCP/Affirmative Action Programs

• OFCCP compensation audits–resolved audits without payment of any back pay, through use of comparator and/or statistical analyses. Notice of violation had initially been issued or allegation by OFCCP of statistical discrimination had been made in the following back pay amounts:
  
  
  • Over $1,800,000 (including value of benefits) – laborers (helpers) – OFCCP alleged that the hiring rate for minority applicants was more than 3.00 standard deviations less than expected, a 17-person shortfall – Indiana District Office.
    
    
  • Over $1,100,000 – operatives (drivers) – OFCCP alleged that the hiring rate for minority applicants was more than 3.25 standard deviations less than expected, a 37-person shortfall – St. Louis District Office.
    
    
  • Over $1,050,000 - laborers and operatives (testing issues) - OFCCP alleged that the hiring rate for minority applicants was more than 3.4 standard deviations less than expected and for female applicants was more than 2.5 standard deviations less than expected, a 18-person shortfall – Milwaukee District Office.
    
    
  • Over $1,000,000 – craft workers and operatives – Northern New Jersey District Office.
    
    
  • Over $600,000 – officials and managers and professionals – New York City District Office.
    
    
  • Over $450,000 – upper management, supervisors, professionals and office and clerical – Columbus District Office.
    
    
  • Over $275,000 – laborers – construction contractor – OFCCP alleged that the hiring rate for minority applicants was more than 5 standard deviations less than expected, a 17-person shortfall – Milwaukee District Office.
    
    
  • Over $250,000 – managers, supervisors and sales workers – Boston District Office.
    
    
  • Over $150,000 – operatives and laborers – Seattle District Office.
    
    
  • Over $100,000 – professionals, technicians and office and clerical – Milwaukee District Office.
    
    
  • Over $75,000 – operatives – Minneapolis Area Office.
    
    
• Successfully convinced OFCCP to terminate numerous compliance audits by showing that (a) the company being audited was not a covered government contractor or subcontractor (including hospitals and medical clinics providing services to federal employees through the Federal Employee Health Benefits program) and (b) although the company’s parent or subsidiary was a covered contractor or subcontractor, the company and its parent or subsidiary did not qualify as a “single employer” under the OFCCP’s test for coverage, including, a major manufacturing subsidiary of a corporate parent who had just successfully completed a Corporate Management Review (“Glass Ceiling Audit”) in the prior year.