Questioning of OSU officials allowed
An age-discrimination lawsuit against Ohio State is moving forward, after a federal magistrate refused to prevent the plaintiff’s lawyer from questioning university officials, including President Michael V. Drake.
U.S. Magistrate Chelsey M. Vascura in Columbus wrote in a Dec. 1 opinion that Julianne Taaffe and Kathryn Moon, who worked in the university’s English as a Second Language program, are entitled to search for evidence of ongoing discriminatory policies and practices.
The 2-year-old lawsuit alleges that OSU officials had violated the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act since 2010, by not stopping efforts to get rid of older workers without cause.
Taaffe, now 62, and Moon, now 66, contend they were forced to retire in 2014 by Robert Eckhart, then the ESL department’s executive director, who launched “an aggressive campaign to drive out the older staff.” He called them “millstones” around his neck and “dead wood,” according to the suit.
University attorneys had sought a court order preventing attorney Fred Gittes from taking the depositions of Drake and other university officials, whom Ohio State contended would be subjected to “annoyance, embarrassment, oppression or undue burden of expense.”
Vascura found the university’s concerns “unsubstantiated.”
“That decision has really upped the stakes in the case,” said Patricia G. Barnes, a Tucson, Arizona, lawyer and author of “Overcoming Age Discrimination in Employment.”
“That puts the CEO (Drake) in a difficult position, because being on the stand can be a very uncertain place to be as to what questions are asked,” Barnes said. “I’m sure the university is not happy about that.”
Ohio State spokesman Chris Davey said the university would not discuss pending litigation.
“The Ohio State University is committed to hiring a diverse and inclusive workforce and providing equal opportunities for all. The university does not tolerate or engage in discrimination in any form,” Davey said in a statement. “We are studying the judge’s order and considering all of our options.”
Gittes contends that correspondence between Eckhart and the humanresources administrator for the ESL department, Jacqulyn Severance, is evidence of an attempt to get rid of older workers.
Eckhart is quoted in the suit as wanting to modernize the program by bringing in younger talent and equates working with the older teachers, who taught English to foreign-born university employees, to “herding hippos.” He allegedly referred to an older staff member with a mobility issue as “just an old lady who can’t walk” and another who used a cane and wore a religious head scarf as “the Grim Reaper.”
Eckhart refused to interview older applicants, Taaffe said, and he was ordered by superiors to rework her evaluation by a previous executive director because it was “artificially high.”
Barnes, who has been following the case, called the alleged behavior of Eckhart “shocking.”
In a May 5, 2014, email to Eckhart, Severance wrote, “Let’s take our time and make subtle changes and it would push the ones out that we needed to go.”
Moon had worked as an ESL instructor for 31 years at the university, and Taaffe for more than 20 years. Moon said she and Taaffe, not the younger instructors, were the innovators, attending seminars on developing online courses.
Taaffe complained of discriminatory practices to Keith Calloway, who was
in charge of investigating potential discrimination at Ohio State. Calloway, she said, sided with the university. The women said their letters about age discrimination sent to Drake and former Ohio State President E. Gordon Gee went unanswered.
In October 2014, Taaffe, Moon and other older fulltime instructors were told that as of Jan. 1, 2015, they would be classified as lecturers and cut to four-month contracts. Whether their contracts were renewed would depend on the department’s needs.
The next month, with no job security, pending pension deductions and “no hope of OSU’s protection from the ongoing pattern of age discrimination,” both women retired.
In September 2015, they sued Drake, Eckhart and other university officials.
Two months ago, the women received a letter from Ohio State — out of the blue, they said — offering them jobs with the ESL department. They took the jobs for the salary and benefits — and out of curiosity.
Less than a month later, university attorneys argued in their motion for a protective order that the rehiring negated the need for Gittes to question Drake and company.
Vascura didn’t see it that way.
“Unless Defendants want the Court to construe the rehiring as an admission of ADEA (Age Discrimination in Employment Act) violations, the rehiring does not relieve Plaintiffs of proving that those violations occurred and that they are ongoing,” Vascura wrote.
Being rehired by a university that didn’t want you and that you sued is awkward, Moon said, especially because the new environment is over-the-top friendly.
“They are so nice to us that it is scary,” Moon said. She and Taaffe talked with The Dispatch at Gittes’ office on Thursday.
Previously, she said, computers were taken away from older workers, who also lost offices and work spaces to younger workers.
“Now, Julie and I have computers with dual screens,” Moon said. “Every once in a while, we wonder what is going on here.”
Taafe and Moon estimated they have lost a total of $500,000 in wages and benefits since they retired and were rehired.
Their lawsuit cannot seek monetary damages from the state university because of what is called “sovereign immunity.” A win would be a court ordering the university to stop age discrimination.
However, they can seek damages through the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which has found “reasonable cause” to believe Taaffe and Moon were victims of discrimination.
Gittes said the commission could try to mediate a settlement between the two parties, join Taaffe and Moon’s lawsuit, or file its own suit against Ohio State.