Female attorneys at Jones Day can pursue pay discrimination claims

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has rejected a bid by Jones Day to dismiss the claims of six female attorneys who allege that the firm's pay practices have a disparate impact on women. Specifically, the court found that the former employees' complaint adequately described how the firm's practices, including a "black-box" pay system and policies prohibiting coworkers from discussing their compensation, discriminated against female attorneys.

In the same ruling, the court sided with Jones Day in dismissing a number of the attorneys' other claims, including their hostile work environment allegations as well as some allegations of Equal Pay Act (EPA) violations and discriminatory practices affecting pregnant women and mothers. However, by allowing the sex-based disparate impact claims to move forward, the court's ruling brings the case closer to the discovery (pretrial fact-finding) phase.

9th Circuit hears case challenging university's pay decisions

Jennifer Freyd, a psychology professor at the University of Oregon, has challenged a district court's dismissal of her complaint that the university discriminated against her by paying her less than her male counterparts. In her original complaint, Freyd identified four male colleagues in the psychology department who she claimed were paid significantly higher salaries, despite the fact that she has a longer tenure at the university. In 2019, the district court granted summary judgment (i.e., dismissed the case without a trial) on the grounds that any pay differential was the result of significant differences in duties.