Novartis Must Pay Punitive Damages in Class Action Discrimination Suit
Jury awards 12 women more than $3 million.
May 17, 2010 at 08:00 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Due to a systematic pattern of discrimination against its female employees, Novartis Corp. must pay more than $3 million in compensation to 12 women, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled on May 18th. However, these 12 women are a mere fraction of those represented in this class action suit. “The verdict supports the claims of 5,600 women,” Davis Sanford, the plaintiffs' lawyer, told Bloomberg Tuesday.
According to Sanford, gender bias is not a new concern. “Novartis has been involved in systemic discrimination since 2002,” he told Bloomberg. The women claim Novartis discouraged pregnancies, ignored sexual harassment complaints and passed over qualified women for promotion, choosing instead less-qualified men.
The plaintiffs in the class action originally sought $200 million from the Swiss drug manufacturer for back pay, lost benefits and adjusted wages. Their disappointment in the minimal $3.4 million compensation was offset by the fact that this is the first gender bias class action in which a jury will have awarded punitive damages.
Novartis Corp. protests that the charges were unfounded and has issued a statement saying that they will consider an appeal.
For more information, please see: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703315404575250643225081152.html?mg=com-wsj
Due to a systematic pattern of discrimination against its female employees, Novartis Corp. must pay more than $3 million in compensation to 12 women, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
According to Sanford, gender bias is not a new concern. “Novartis has been involved in systemic discrimination since 2002,” he told Bloomberg. The women claim Novartis discouraged pregnancies, ignored sexual harassment complaints and passed over qualified women for promotion, choosing instead less-qualified men.
The plaintiffs in the class action originally sought $200 million from the Swiss drug manufacturer for back pay, lost benefits and adjusted wages. Their disappointment in the minimal $3.4 million compensation was offset by the fact that this is the first gender bias class action in which a jury will have awarded punitive damages.
Novartis Corp. protests that the charges were unfounded and has issued a statement saying that they will consider an appeal.
For more information, please see: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703315404575250643225081152.html?mg=com-wsj
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
3 minute readOld Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Lawsuit Against Amazon Could Reshape E-Commerce Landscape
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250