• Most Popular
  • Most Shared

State Employees' Equal Pay Lawsuit to Go to Trial August 19 in Indianapolis

Fri Aug 15, 2008 8:30am EDT
Equal pay for equal work? Not for 15,000 Indiana employees, forced for years
to work more hours than peers in comparable jobs, now seeking compensation
from State
 
INDIANAPOLIS, Aug. 15 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A lawsuit brought by Indiana
state employees who worked longer hours than comparable employees without
additional pay is scheduled to go to trial on Tuesday, August 19, in Marion
Superior Court.
 
The $42 million class action suit, Paula Brattain et al v. Richmond State
Hospital et al, (cause no. 49D11-0108-CP-1309) represents an estimated 15,000
state employees at state institutions and offices who were required to work a
40-hour week while employees in similar positions at other state institutions
and offices were receiving comparable pay for a 37.5-hour week. 
 
Since at least 1973, some state employees were working 40-hour weeks while
others in comparable positions received the same pay for 37.5-hour weeks. In
1987, the State Personnel Director mandated that all employees at certain
state institutions were to work 40 hours per week, and as a result many
employees were required to work an extra 2.5 hours weekly with no increase in
pay. At the same time, full-time employees in comparable jobs at other state
locations continued to work 37.5 hours per week 
 
Employees affected by the change had to either cut their lunch hours or extend
their work day to meet the directive.  
 
The State of Indiana corrected the pay disparity in 1993 after an appeals
court ruled in favor of 35 employees that challenged the State's policy. 
Following that decision, a new state directive based all salaries for
full-time employees on a 37.5-hour week. This class action suit followed.  But
the State has long resisted compensating employees who worked for years at an
effective hourly rate lower than that earned by other state employees in
comparable positions. 

John F. Kautzman of Ruckelshaus Kautzman Blackwell Bemis and Hasbrook, an
attorney for the employees, said, "For two decades the State of Indiana failed
to meet the most basic standard of fairness -- equal pay for equal work -- and
short-changed thousands of employees. Now the State continues to fight tooth
and nail to avoid compensating employees who worked for years at a lower rate
than peers with the same job description and pay grade. If the State won't
rectify this plain injustice, we're confident that the Court will." 
 
Class member Dave Larson, Executive Director of the Indiana State Employees
Association who worked as a prison guard for the State, said, "While working
for the State, I was told by different officers that they only worked 7.5
hours a day. When I found they were being paid the same as I was, I had a hard
time believing the State would treat employees unfairly. Even more incredibly,
the State has resisted and spent countless hours and tax dollars over the
course of  fifteen years to avoid fulfilling its contractual and moral
responsibility to thousands of employees."
 

 

 

SOURCE  Ruckelshaus Kautzman Blackwell Bemis and Hasbrook

Joy Howell, +1-202-828-7838, or Andrew Sprung, +1-646-792-3739, both for
Ruckelshaus Kautzman Blackwell Bemis and Hasbrook



More from Reuters

Photo

Investors seen jumping the gun on airport security

BANGALORE (Reuters) - Investors' optimism surrounding the shares of airport security systems makers could be premature as interest in the companies' products after the Christmas Day plane scare is not expected to translate into immediate orders.

A hiring sign hangs in a window at PETCO in Falls Church, Virginia June 5, 2009.REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

Dust off your resumes

Employers say they'll be adding headcount in the coming year. Here's where the jobs will be.  Full Article 

A traveller lifts her arms as she stands in the new security scan at Schiphol airport, Netherlands, May 15, 2007.REUTERS/Jerry Lampen

Are you ok getting "naked"?

Full-body scanners can detect weapons under clothing but also expose passengers to operators. Should security trump privacy?  Full Article | Video