City of Milpitas – Age Discrimination, Retaliation

In 2015, David Browne, alongside co-counsel Kathy Dickson of Dickson Geesman LLP, filed a lawsuit against the City of Milpitas in Santa Clara County Superior Court on behalf of a long-term city employee, alleging age discrimination and retaliation in violation of California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA).

The Case

Our client worked for the City for more than eleven years and had more seniority than others who kept their jobs. In the City’s 2012 layoff, she was told that reassignment was not an option, while a younger, less senior employee was reassigned and later promoted into a higher-paying position. In defending its decision, the City noted that our client was “of sufficient age to retire.” We alleged that using retirement eligibility this way is age discrimination, and that when our client complained about the fairness of the layoff, the City retaliated by finalizing her termination.

Before filing suit, our client brought her claims to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The EEOC investigated and issued a determination that the City had laid her off because of her age, and that it had discriminated against a class of individuals over 40 when it filled the position she later applied for with a less qualified applicant under 40. The EEOC then filed its own lawsuit against the City in federal court over the same hiring process; the City settled that case by consent decree in April 2016, paying $140,000 to three applicants.

The Resolution

The case resolved in late 2015. Because the City is a public entity, the settlement terms are part of the public record and were reported in the press: our client returned to work for the City in November 2015, about three and a half years after her layoff, with her seniority and benefits restored as though the layoff had never happened, along with full retiree medical coverage for herself and her spouse and a $600,000 payment for lost wages and benefits, emotional distress, and attorneys’ fees. Reinstatement years after a termination, with seniority intact, is a rare outcome in employment cases.

Case Documents

• Complaint — Age Discrimination, Retaliation, and Failure to Prevent Discrimination (May 13, 2015)

Press Coverage

• EEOC Sues City of Milpitas for Age Discrimination, EEOC Press Release (Sept. 28, 2015)
• City manager says employee’s age discrimination lawsuit against Milpitas dropped, The Mercury News (Jan. 15, 2016)
• Milpitas to Pay $140,000 to Settle EEOC Age Discrimination Suit, EEOC Press Release (Apr. 15, 2016)
• Milpitas to settle age-discrimination suit for $140,000, SFGate (Apr. 15, 2016)
• Milpitas: federal age discrimination lawsuit against city settled, Monterey Herald (Apr. 18, 2016)

* Descriptions and summaries of prior cases and settlements found on this website are intended only to provide information about the activities and experience of our attorneys and should not be understood as a guarantee or assurance of future success in any matter. The results portrayed were dependent on a variety of facts and circumstances unique to the particular matters described, and do not reflect the entire record of the individual attorney(s) involved. Past results are not a guarantee of future results, and the outcome of your particular case or matter cannot be predicted using a lawyer’s or law firm’s past results. Every case is unique and different and should be evaluated on its own merits, without comparison to other cases that may have had different facts and circumstances.