Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 1-3 Filed 09/12/2005 Page 1 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

St;c-'- ·

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

)

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 194 )

OF LAKEVILLE, MN,

)

)

________________D_efe_n_da_nt_. _____

)
)

Civil Action No. oS- 2.0'8b .
r.:zJt /L- ( lsfV)
COMPLAINT
Jury Trial Demand

NATURE OF THE ACTION This is an action under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA'') to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of age, and to provide appropriate relief to Gary Anderson, Donna Curry, Wayne Daugherty, LaVonne Gades, Sharon Laingen, Larry McCaghy, Blair Nelson, Marilyn Oliphant, Dave Page, Michael Sexton, and Maxine Saul, and other similarly situated individuals ("class members"). The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("Commission") alleges that from June 1999 through at least June 2000, Independent School District No. 194 of Lakeville, MN ("ISD 194") discriminated against the class members by paying a early retirement incentive cash benefit and retiree health insurance premium benefits which had been reduced because of age.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 7(b) of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 626(b) (the "ADEA''),
r-;:S:v:C.....-A.-:-NN:-:-:E=o=----
SEP o9 ZOOS ·

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 1-3 Filed 09/12/2005 Page 2 of 6

which incorporates by reference Sections 16(c) and 17 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938

(the "FLSA"), as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 216(c) and 217.

2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the

jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota.

PARTIES

3. Plaintiff, the Commission, is an agency ofthe United States of America charged

with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of the ADEA and is expressly authorized

to bring this action by Section ?(b) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 626(b), as amended by Section 2

of Reorganization Plan No. I of 1978, 92 Stat. 3781, and by Public Law 98-532 (1984), 98 Stat.

2705. 4.

At all relevant times, lSD 194 has continuously been a public school district,

known as the Lakeville Area Public Schools, operating in Lakeville, Minnesota, and has

continuously had at least 20 employees. 5. At all relevant times, lSD 194 has continuously been an employer, apolitical

subdivision of a State, within the meaning of Section 11(b) of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 630(b).

CONCILIATION

6. Prior to the institution of this lawsuit, the Commission's representatives attempted

to eliminate the unlawful employment practices alleged below and to effect voluntary compliance

with the ADEA through informal methods of conciliation, conference and persuasion within the

meaning of Section ?(b) ofthe ADEA, 29 U.S.C. § 626(b).

2

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 1-3 Filed 09/12/2005 Page 3 of 6
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 7. From at least June 1999 through at least June 2000, ISD 194 engaged in unlawful employment practices in violation of Section 4(a) of the ADEA, 29 U.S. C.§ 623(a), by entering into collective bargaining agreements which provided retiring employees a cash early retirement incentive, and retiree health insurance premium benefits. The early retirement incentive consisted of a severance benefit calculated as 5 days pay for each year of service to a maximum of 50 plus 50 percent of pay for unused sick days to a maximum of 50. Teachers were eligible at age 55 with 20 years of service. The early retirement incentive, and the retiree health insurance premium benefits, were reduced because of the employee's age, with retiring employees receiving at age 55, 100%; age 56, 95%; age 57, 90%; age 58, 85%; age 59, 80%; age 60, 75%; age 61, 60%; age 62, 45%; age 63, 30%; age 64, 15%; age 65 or older, 0%. Since June 1999, the following employees who retired from ISD 194 have had their benefits reduced, specifically: a. Gary Anderson, who retired in June 2000, had his benefits reduced by 25% because of his age, 60. b. Donna Curry, who retired in June 2000, had her benefits reduced by 15% because of her age, 58. c. Wayne Daugherty, who retired in June 2000, had his benefits reduced by 15% because of his age, 58. d. LaVonne Gades, who retired in June 1999, had her benefits reduced by 5% because of her age, 56. e. Sharon Laingen, who retired in June 1999, had her benefits reduced by 20% because of her age, 59.
3

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 1-3 Filed 09/12/2005 Page 4 of 6

f.

Larry McCaghy, who retired in June 1999, had his benefits reduced by 15%

because of his age, 58. g. Blair Nelson, who retired in June 2000, had his benefits reduced by 5% because of

his age, 56. h. Marilyn Oliphant, who retired in June 2000, had her benefits reduced by 55%

because of her age, 62.

1.

Dave Page, who retired in June 1999, had his benefits reduced by 20% because of

his age, 59.

j.

Maxine Saul, who retired in June 2000, had her benefits reduced by 10% because

of her age, 57. k. Michael Sexton, who retired in June 2000, had his benefits reduced by 15%

because of his age, 58.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant lSD 194, its appointees,

employees, officers, successors, assigns, divisions, and all persons in active concert or

participation with them, from engaging in employment practices that discriminate on the basis of

age against individuals aged 40 and older. B. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant lSD 194 from offering any

early retirement incentive program or retiree health insurance premium benefits program which

reduce benefits because of age.

4

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 1-3 Filed 09/12/2005 Page 5 of 6

C. Grant a judgment requiring Defendant ISD 194 to pay class members the amount

of the early retirement incentive benefit and the retiree health insurance premium benefits to

which each would have been entitled prior to the reduction based on his or her age, plus

prejudgment interest. D. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public

interest. E.

Award the Commission its costs of this action.

5

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 1-3 Filed 09/12/2005 Page 6 of 6
JURY TRIAL DEMAND The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its Complaint.
EQUAL EMPLOYMEJ'I.'T OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Eric S. Dreiband General Counsel James L. Lee Deputy General Counsel Gwendolyn Young Reams Associate General Counsel 1801 L Street NW Washington, DC 20507
Dated: --..~'---'-o!.L...!7:._-_0_)_-__
Milwaukee District Office 31 0 West Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 800 Milwaukee, WI 53203-2292 (414) 297-1860 Laurie A. Vasichek (#0171438) Senior Trial Attorney Minneapolis Area Office 330 Second Avenue South, Suite 430 Minneapolis, MN 55401 (612) 335-4061
6

 </s> Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 2 Filed 09/15/2005 Page 1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

)

)

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY )

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

v.

) Civil No. 05-2086 (RHK/JSM)

)

INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT

) CONSENT JUDGMENT

NO. 194 OF LAKEVILLE, MN,

)

)

Defendant.

)

)

Introduction

Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (hereinafter

the "Commission") has instituted this action alleging that Defendant

Independent School District No. 194 of Lakeville, MN discriminated against

certain of its employees because of their age in the implementation and

administration of its retirement incentive plans in violation of the Age

Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §621, et seq. (hereinafter "ADEA").

For purposes of settlement and compromise only, the parties have

advised the Court that they wish to resolve the instant controversy without the

expense, delay, and burden of further litigation;

THEREFORE, it is the finding of this Court, made on the pleadings

and on the record as a whole and upon agreement of the parties, that: (i) this

Court has jurisdiction over the parties to and the subject matter of this action, (ii)

1

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 2 Filed 09/15/2005 Page 2 of 8
the requirements of the ADEA will be carried out by the implementation of this Judgment, (iii) this Judgment is intended to and does resolve all matters in controversy in this lawsuit among the parties, and (iv) the terms of this Judgment constitute a fair and equitable settlement of all issues in this lawsuit.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows: I. Injunctive Relief
1. Defendant shall not implement and/or administer any retirement incentive plan in which the amount of the benefit payable under the plan is reduced because of age or on the basis of an employee's continued employment beyond his or her date of first eligibility for retirement under the applicable retirement plan(s).
2. Defendant shall not discriminate or retaliate against any person because he or she has opposed any practices alleged in this action as unlawful under the ADEA, has participated in an investigation conducted under the ADEA with respect to this complaint, or has participated in this lawsuit or has benefitted in any way as a result of this Consent Judgment.
II. Relief for Aggrieved Persons 3. Within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Judgment, Defendant shall issue a check to each person listed on Exhibit A attached hereto in the gross amount listed on Exhibit A, less only any applicable deductions for the employee's portion of FICA and applicable federal and state income tax
2

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 2 Filed 09/15/2005 Page 3 of 8
withholdings. The check shall be mailed by certified mail to the person's last known address, which shall be provided by the EEOC within ten days of the entry of this Judgment. The Defendant shall send a copy of the checks to the EEOC at the time of mailing to the persons listed on Exhibit A.
III. Posting and Policies 4. Defendant shall post and cause to remain posted the posters required to be displayed in the workplace by EEOC regulation 29 C.F.R. §1601.30 in all facilities owned and operated by Defendant. 5. Defendant shall post and cause to remain posted copies of the notice attached hereto as Exhibit B in locations publicly visible to all employees in all Independent School District No.194 of Lakeville, MN facilities for a period of one (1) year starting from the date of entry of this Judgment.
IV. Reporting 6. Within forty-five (45) days of the entry of this Judgment, Defendant shall prepare and submit to the undersigned EEOC attorney a letter indicating that the notice has been posted as required by paragraph 5 above. 7. During the term of this Judgment, Defendant will notify the undersigned EEOC attorney if it implements and/or revises any retirement incentive plans applicable to any of Defendant's employees within ten (10) days of the implementation or revision. Defendant shall forward copies of any and all
3

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 2 Filed 09/15/2005 Page 4 of 8
retirement incentive plans which are implemented and/or revised at any time during the term of this Judgment along with such notification.
8. During the term of this Judgment, Defendant shall allow representatives of the Commission to review Defendant's compliance with this Judgment by inspecting and photocopying relevant documents and records, interviewing employees and management officials on their premises, and inspecting their premises. Such review of compliance shall be initiated by written notice to the Defendant's attorney of record at least seven (7) business days in advance of any inspection of a Defendant's documents or premises.
V. Term and Effect of Judgment 9. Defendant Independent School District No.194 of Lakeville, MN represents that Exhibit A is a true and complete list of every person who retired on or after June 1999 and who was subject to a collective bargaining provision that reduced an early retirement incentive based upon the retiree's age. Subject to this representation, this Judgment constitutes the full, final and complete resolution of the EEOC's claim that Defendant Independent School District No.194 of Lakeville, MN violated the ADEA by discriminating against certain of its employees because of their age in the implementation and administration of its retirement incentive plans in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §621, et seq. (hereinafter "ADEA").
4

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 2 Filed 09/15/2005 Page 5 of 8

10. By entering into this Judgment, the parties do not intend to resolve any charges of discrimination currently pending before the Plaintiff other than charges that created the procedural foundation for the complaint in this case and those of persons listed on Exhibit A.
11. This Judgment shall be for a period of five years and can only be extended for good cause shown. During the Judgment's term the Court shall retain jurisdiction of this cause for purposes of compliance.
12. Each party shall bear that party's own costs.

DATE: 9/15/05

BY CONSENT: FOR DEFENDANT:

S/Richard H. Kyle Judge United States District Court
FOR PLAINTIFF:

__s/Patricia A. Maloney____ Patricia A. Maloney (67015) Ratwik, Roszak & Maloney, P.A. 300 U.S. Trust Building 730 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55404 (612) 339 -0060

__s/Laurie A. Vasichek_______ Laurie A. Vasichek (0171438) Senior Trial Attorney Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 330 2nd Avenue South, Suite 430 Minneapolis, MN 55401 (612) 335-4061
5

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 2 Filed 09/15/2005 Page 6 of 8 laurie.vasichek@eeoc.gov
6

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 2 Filed 09/15/2005 Page 7 of 8

class member
Gary Anderson Donna Curry Wayne Daugherty LaVonne Gades Carol Keil James Knutson Sharon Laingen Larry McCaghy Blair Nelson Catherine Olinger Marilyn Oliphant Dave Page Maxine Saul Michael Sexton

EXHIBIT A

backpay
$ 3,413.31 2,389.65 1,788.80 667.42 3,281.90 3,281.90 2,468.82 2,088.44 610.81 0.00 6,299.64 3,093.40 2,094.62 1,691.16

interest
$ 1,687.19 1,182.53 885.23 333.84 624.45 624.45 1,235.03 1,044.76 302.28 72.12 3,117.43 1,560.35 506.52 836.87

total
$ 5,100.50 3,572.18 2,674.03 1,001.26 3,906.35 3,906.35 3,703.85 3,133.20 913.09 72.12 9,417.07 4,653.75 2,601.14 2,528.03

totals

$33,169.87 $14,013.05

$47,182.92

7

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 2 Filed 09/15/2005 Page 8 of 8
EXHIBIT B (TO BE TYPED ON SCHOOL DISTRICT LETTERHEAD)
NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES This Notice is posted pursuant to a Consent Judgment resolving a lawsuit with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Federal law requires that there be no discrimination against any employee or applicant for employment because of the individual's race, color, religion, sex, national origin or age (40 and over) with respect to hiring, promotion, firing, compensation, or other terms, conditions or privileges of employment. Independent School District No. 104 of Lakeville, MN will comply with such Federal law in all respects and will not take any action against employees because they have exercised their rights under the law. Specifically, Independent School District No.194 of Lakeville, MN will not implement or administer any retirement incentive plan that discriminates against employees on the basis of age in that it reduces benefits based upon age or upon an employee's continued employment beyond his or her date of first eligibility for retirement.
SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS
8

 </s> Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 3 Filed 09/20/2005 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

______________________________)

)

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY )

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

v.

) Civil No. 05-2086 (RHK/JSM)

)

INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT

)

AMENDED

NO. 194 OF LAKEVILLE, MN,

) CONSENT JUDGMENT

)

Defendant.

)

)

Introduction

Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (hereinafter

the "Commission") has instituted this action alleging that Defendant

Independent School District No. 194 of Lakeville, MN discriminated against

certain of its employees because of their age in the implementation and

administration of its retirement incentive plans in violation of the Age

Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §621, et seq. (hereinafter "ADEA").

For purposes of settlement and compromise only, the parties have

advised the Court that they wish to resolve the instant controversy without the

expense, delay, and burden of further litigation;

THEREFORE, it is the finding of this Court, made on the pleadings

and on the record as a whole and upon agreement of the parties, that: (i) this

Court has jurisdiction over the parties to and the subject matter of this action, (ii)

1

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 3 Filed 09/20/2005 Page 2 of 7
the requirements of the ADEA will be carried out by the implementation of this Judgment, (iii) this Judgment is intended to and does resolve all matters in controversy in this lawsuit among the parties, and (iv) the terms of this Judgment constitute a fair and equitable settlement of all issues in this lawsuit.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follow s: I. Injunctive Relief
1. Defendant shall not implement and/or administer any retirement incentive plan in which the amount of the benefit payable under the plan is reduced because of age or on the basis of an employee's continued employment beyond his or her date of first eligibility for retirement under the applicable retirement plan(s).
2. Defendant shall not discriminate or retaliate against any person because he or she has opposed any practices alleged in this action as unlawful under the ADEA, has participated in an investigation conducted under the ADEA with respect to this complaint, or has participated in this lawsuit or has benefitted in any way as a result of this Consent Judgment.
II. Relief for Aggrieved Persons 3. Within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Judgment, Defendant shall issue a check to each person listed on Exhibit A attached hereto in the gross amount listed on Exhibit A, less only any applicable deductions for the employee's portion of FICA and applicable federal and state income tax
2

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 3 Filed 09/20/2005 Page 3 of 7
withholdings. The check shall be mailed by certified mail to the person's last known address, which shall be provided by the EEOC within ten days of the entry of this Judgment. The Defendant shall send a copy of the checks to the EEOC at the time of mailing to the persons listed on Exhibit A.
III. Posting and Policies 4. Defendant shall post and cause to remain posted the posters required to be displayed in the workplace by EEOC regulation 29 C.F.R. §1601.30 in all facilities owned and operated by Defendant. 5. Defendant shall post and cause to remain posted copies of the notice attached hereto as Exhibit B in locations publicly visible to all employees in all Independent School District No.194 of Lakeville, MN facilities for a period of one (1) year starting from the date of entry of this Judgment.
IV. Reporting 6. Within forty-five (45) days of the entry of this Judgment, Defendant shall prepare and submit to the undersigned EEOC attorney a letter indicating that the notice has been posted as required by paragraph 5 above. 7. During the term of this Judgment, Defendant will notify the undersigned EEOC attorney if it implements and/or revises any retirement incentive plans applicable to any of Defendant's employees within ten (10) days of the implementation or revision. Defendant shall forward copies of any and all
3

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 3 Filed 09/20/2005 Page 4 of 7
retirement incentive plans which are implemented and/or revised at any time during the term of this Judgment along with such notification.
8. During the term of this Judgment, Defendant shall allow representatives of the Commission to review Defendant's compliance with this Judgment by inspecting and photocopying relevant documents and records, interviewing employees and management officials on their premises, and inspecting their premises. Such review of compliance shall be initiated by written notice to the Defendant's attorney of record at least seven (7) business days in advance of any inspection of a Defendant's documents or premises.
V. Term and Effect of Judgment 9. Defendant Independent School District No.194 of Lakeville, MN represents that Exhibit A is a true and complete list of every person who retired on or after June 1999 and who was subject to a collective bargaining provision that reduced an early retirement incentive based upon the retiree's age. Subject to this representation, this Judgment constitutes the full, final and complete resolution of the EEOC's claim that Defendant Independent School District No.194 of Lakeville, MN violated the ADEA by discriminating against certain of its employees because of their age in the implementation and administration of its retirement incentive plans in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §621, et seq. (hereinafter "ADEA").
4

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 3 Filed 09/20/2005 Page 5 of 7

10. By entering into this Judgment, the parties do not intend to resolve any charges of discrimination currently pending before the Plaintiff other than charges that created the procedural foundation for the complaint in this case and those of persons listed on Exhibit A.
11. This Judgment shall be for a period of five years and can only be extended for good cause shown. During the Judgment's term the Court shall retain jurisdiction of this cause for purposes of compliance.
12. Each party shall bear that party's own costs. Dated: September 20, 2005
s/Richard H. Kyle RICHARD H. KYLE United States District Judge

BY CONSENT: FOR DEFENDANT:

FOR PLAINTIFF:

s/Patricia A. Maloney Patricia A. Maloney (67015) Ratwik, Roszak & Maloney, P.A. 300 U.S. Trust Building 730 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55404 (612) 339 -0060

s/Laurie A. Vasichek Laurie A. Vasichek (0171438) Senior Trial Attorney Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 330 2nd Avenue South, Suite 430 Minneapolis, MN 55401 (612) 335-4061 laurie.vasichek@eeoc.gov

5

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 3 Filed 09/20/2005 Page 6 of 7

class member
Gary Anderson Donna Curry Wayne Daugherty LaVonne Gades Carol Keil James Knutson Sharon Laingen Larry McCaghy Blair Nelson Catherine Olinger Marilyn Oliphant Dave Page Maxine Saul Michael Sexton
totals

EXHIBIT A

backpay
$ 3,413.31 2,389.65 1,788.80 667.42 3,281.90 3,281.90 2,468.82 2,088.44 610.81 1,415.94 6,299.64 3,093.40 650.05 1,691.16

interest
$ 1,687.19 1,182.53 885.23 333.84 624.45 624.45 1,235.03 1,044.76 302.28 285.83 3,117.43 1,560.35 334.06 836.87

total
$ 5,100.50 3,572.18 2,674.03 1,001.26 3,906.35 3,906.35 3,703.85 3,133.20 913.09 1,701.77 9,417.07 4,653.75 984.11 2,528.03

$33,141.24 $14,054.30

$47,195.54

6

Case 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM Document 3 Filed 09/20/2005 Page 7 of 7
EXHIBIT B (TO BE TYPED ON SCHOOL DISTRICT LETTERHEAD)
NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES This Notice is posted pursuant to a Consent Judgment resolving a lawsuit with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Federal law requires that there be no discrimination against any employee or applicant for employment because of the individual's race, color, religion, sex, national origin or age (40 and over) with respect to hiring, promotion, firing, compensation, or other terms, conditions or privileges of employment. Independent School District No. 194 of Lakeville, MN will comply with such Federal law in all respects and will not take any action against employees because they have exercised their rights under the law. Specifically, Independent School District No.194 of Lakeville, MN will not implement or administer any retirement incentive plan that discriminates against employees on the basis of age in that it reduces benefits based upon age or upon an employee's continued employment beyond his or her date of first eligibility for retirement.
SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS
7

 </s> CM/ECF - District of Minnesota - Live - Docket Report

https://ecf.mnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?527388248606206-L_9...

U.S. District Court District of Minnesota (DMN) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM

CLOSED, T7

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Independent School District No. 194 Assigned to: Judge Richard H. Kyle Referred to: Magistrate Judge Janie S. Mayeron Cause: 29:626 Job Discrimination (Age)

Date Filed: 09/09/2005 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Eric S Dreiband Not Admitted LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Gwendolyn Young Reams Not Admitted LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

James L Lee Not Admitted LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jean P Kamp Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 310 W Wisconsin Ave Ste 800 Milwaukee, WI 53203-2292 414-297-1860 Fax: 414-297-3146 Email: jean.kamp@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Laurie A Vasichek Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 330 S 2nd Ave Ste 430 Minneapolis, MN 55401-2224 612-335-4040 Fax: 612-335-4044 Email: laurie.vasichek@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

1 of 2

5/7/2007 6:25 PM

CM/ECF - District of Minnesota - Live - Docket Report

https://ecf.mnd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?527388248606206-L_9...

V.
Defendant Independent School District No. 194 of Lakeville, MN

represented by Patricia A Maloney Ratwik Roszak & Maloney 730 2nd Ave S Ste 300 Mpls, MN 55402 612-339-0060 Fax: 612-339-0038 Email: pam@ratwiklaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/12/2005
09/15/2005 09/20/2005

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against Independent School District No. 194 of Lakeville, MN ( Filing fee Waived.) Assigned to Judge Richard H. Kyle per Civil Rights List and referred to Magistrate Judge Janie S. Mayeron (4:05 AD 1212)., filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(GJS) Additional attachment/Complaint added on 9/12/2005 (gjs) (Entered: 09/12/2005)
2 CONSENT JUDGMENT. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 09/15/05. (rhks) (Entered: 09/15/2005)
3 AMENDED CONSENT JUDGMENT. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 09/20/05. (rhks) (Entered: 09/20/2005)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

PACER Login:
Description:
Billable Pages:

05/07/2007 18:26:54

hs0328

Client Code:

eeoc

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

0:05-cv-02086-RHK-JSM

1

Cost:

0.08

2 of 2

5/7/2007 6:25 PM


[CONTENT] The Minneapolis District Office | the U.S. District Court | District | Minnesota | Independent School District No | 194 ||| September 2005 | the Age Discrimination | 1967 ||| Defendant ||| age fifty-five | twenty years | 100% | age fifty-five | 5% | each additional year ||| Court | five days later ||| 5 years | Defendant | EEOC ||| 47,195.54 | 33,141 | 14,054.30 [SUMMARY] The Minneapolis District Office brought this action in the U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, against Independent School District No. 194 of Lakeville MN.  The complaint, filed in September 2005, alleged age discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967.  Specifically, the complaint alleged Defendant discriminated against the class members by paying an early retirement incentive cash benefit and retiree health insurance premium benefits which had been reduced because of age. Teachers were eligible for benefits at age fifty-five, with twenty years of service, and the benefits were reduced with the employee's age, with retiring employees receiving 100% of benefits at age fifty-five and losing 5% for each additional year the employee waited to retire. 

Almost concurrent with the complaint, parties jointly submitted a proposed consent decree, which the Court signed five days later.  The decree, which was valid for 5 years, included non-discrimination and non-retaliation provisions and, in addition, provided for posting of a non-discrimination notice and monitoring of Defendant's compliance by the EEOC.  Defendant also agreed to pay a total of $47,195.54 to the class members, including $33,141 in back pay and $14,054.30 in interest.

