Thread regarding ConocoPhillips layoffs

Is there a class action lawsuit in the works for age discrimination practices used in the layoffs?

I'm going to go ahead and call BS on that sex discrimination example. Plenty of women being promoted while I was there whether they deserved it or not. No way they were being paid less than 50% of men with equal qualifications. Complete BS.

Discrimination both based on age and sex. Now copy the information into an online form via the EEOC web site to file a case.

Thank you for your last comment. As a side note, I believe COP discriminates for reasons other than age. For example, employees working for COP have always been instructed to NEVER discuss salaries with one another. However, subsequent to the 2015 layoffs I have become aware that while women may have the same or near the same pay grades, their wages were considerably different. As an example (using REAL people), Employee A a woman was paid $128,000/year while Employee B a man was paid $275.000/year. Employee B was paid 53.45% more. Employees A & B were of similar age and pay grade with similar assignments, training, & performance ratings from the same heritage company. Both were laid off. Also, COP has a pay grade structure stating time in grade plus performance ratings as a consideration for promotions. HOWEVER, I know they did not stick to "time in grade" for women. A woman was in the same pay grade from 1988 - 2008 (20 years) with high performance ratings and outstanding, high profile assignments, yet she was not promoted until pressed considerably to do so. Another example - A woman supervisor of the same age noted that only younger employees had been considered locally for promotions and choice assignments, so she had to aggressively pursue other options by applying for a position in another state. She had to move for improvements to her career while most did not. The rules are noted at COP, but they are not adhered to.

The performance ratings are of no interest to the EEOC. HR is very weak at ConooPhillips. The departure of the HR VP is very telling. The United States labor laws are very specific on the process to file a case based on discrimination, ago or otherwise. The labor department is very reactive... FILE A CASE WITH THE EEOC IF YOU FEEL YOU HAVE BEEN DISCRIMINATED BASED ON AGE. Performance and/or the associated ratings are of no significance.

This message is in response to the question, "What is discrimination?" The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is the federal agency charged with eliminating discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, or age, in all terms and conditions of employment. The EEOC investigates alleged discrimination through its 50 field offices, makes determinations based on gathered evidence, attempts conciliation when discrimination has taken place, and files lawsuits. The EEOC also oversees compliance and enforcement activities relating to equal employmentopportunity among federal employees and applicants, including discrimination against individuals with disabilities.

The EEOC was created by title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e-4. Title VII was amended bythe Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972, Pub. L.No. 92-261, Mar. 24, 1972, 86 Stat. 103; the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978, Pub. L. No. 95-555, Oct. 31,1978, 92 Stat. 2076, codified at 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e(K); and the Civil Rights Act of 1991, Pub. L. No. 102-166, 105Stat. 1071. On July 1, 1979, responsibility for enforcement of the Equal Pay Act of 1963, 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 201 et seq.,and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29U.S.C.A. §§ 626 et seq., in private industry as well as state and local governments, was transferred from the Department of Labor to the EEOC. The Equal Pay Act prohibits gender-based pay differences for substantially equal work requiring equal skill and responsibility; the Age Discrimination Act prohibits employment discrimination against workers or applicants 40 years of age or older. Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA),42 U.S.C.A. §§ 12101 et seq. has been enforced by the EEOC since July 1992. Title I governs private employers, state and local governments, employment agencies, labor organizations, and joint labor-management committees. The ADA prohibits employment discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities and requires that employers make reasonable accommodations for these individuals.

Complaints under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 and Equal Pay Act of 1963

The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 and Equal Pay Act of 1963 cover most employees and job applicants in private industry and in the federal, state, and local governments. An age discrimination charge must be filed with the EEOC within 180 days of the alleged violation, or where the action took place in a state that has an age discrimination law and an authority administering that law, within 300 days of the violation or 30 days after receiving the notice of termination of state proceedings, whichever is earlier. A lawsuit must be filed within two years of the alleged discriminatory act or within three years in cases of a willful violation of the law.

Under the Civil Rights Act of 1991, a lawsuit must be filed within 90 days of the plaintiff's receipt of a notice of final action. The EEOC first attempts to end the alleged unlawful practice through informal conciliation. If conciliation fails, the EEOC may sue. Individuals may sue on their own behalf 90 days after filing a charge with the EEOC and the appropriate state agency. If the EEOC takes legal action, an individual covered by the lawsuit may not file a private action.

A lawsuit under the Equal Pay Act of 1963 may be filed by the EEOC or by the complainant. There are no prerequisites for bringing a private action under this law. Wages may be recovered for a period of up to two years prior to the filing of a suit, except in a case of willful violation, for which three years' back pay may be recovered. The name of the individual filing the complaintmay be kept confidential at the administrative level.

I agree that there should be a case if people laid off were high performers. I don't know. The problem exists with the performance rating itself. It is clear that performance ratings 1 & 2 are considered high, but what about the FACT that MOST older, higher pay grade employees were always given a rating of 3. They were always told they were EXPECTED to perform in a higher manner based on expectations of their higher pay grades, and a rating of 3 reflected a STRONG performance. So . . . Should those employees have a case, because they were laid off with a rating of 3, or would the company be able to say while cutting costs they felt compelled to lay off not only those of ratings 4 & 5 but also those with ratings of 3? Seems to me like the company wants it both ways - to tell the employees ratings of 3 represent strong performances, but in a lawsuit they would say those with ratings of 3 were not strong enough to retain, In the end, it's all about money. That is why they are laying off older employees with higher pay grades who are more costly to retain on the payroll as well as costs for benefits including retirement benefits. That seems like an EEOC action to us in the U.S. What does everyone else think?

What discrimination?

Being from a different country I do not understand. They laid off people in a higher income bracket, who happen to be of an older age. Could you just as easily file a class action suit if you were laid off as a high performer?

I'm not being prickly, just trying to understand

Filed a case with the EEOC. Discrimination based on age discrimination starts with a case with the EEOC. The right to sue letter can then be the basis for efforts associated with a lawsuit (class action or otherwise). And do post a summary of the process and the case for others to copy. No smoking guns to be found in age discrimination cases.