UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

Fi1UL V. GArln} A

.-. "-' ~"

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

02 "'40075

Plaintiff,
v.
FLINT INK CORPORATION,

cI\ltf/NQ.STRATE JUDGE PEPE
COMPLAINT JURY TRIAL DEMAND

Defendant. . ____________________________~I

." ...,

NATURE OF THE ACTION

.. \

. :', .-;

... This is an action brought under the Equal Pay Act of 1963, Title VII ofthe Civil Right~ 1ct

of 1964, and Title I ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1991 to restrain the unlawful payment of wages to

employees of one sex at rates less than the rates paid to employees of the opposites sex and to

provide appropriate relief due to Barbara Mark and Colleen Dalton as a result of such unlawful

practices. Specifically, the Commission alleges that Defendant paid Barbara Mark and Colleen

Dalton, Printing Research Laboratory employees, a lower salary than paid to male Printing Research

Laboratory employees although performing substantially equal work.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. Jurisdiction ofthis Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451,1331,1337,1343

and 1345. This action is authorized pursuant to Section 16(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of

1938 (the "FLSA"), as amended, 29 U.S.C. §216(c), to enforce the requirements of the Equal Pay

Act of 1963, codified as Section 6(d) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §206(d), and pursuant to §706(1)(1)

and (3) ofTitle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5 (1)(1) and (3),

and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. §1981a.

\

2. The employment practice alleged to be unlawful was and is now being committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division.
PARTIES 3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of the Equal Pay Act and Title VII, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 16(c) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §216(c), as amended by Section I of Reorganization Plan No.1 of 1978, 92 Stat. 3781, and by Public law 98-532 (1984), 98 Stat. 2705; and by Section 706 (1)(1) and (3) ofTitle VII, 42 U.S.C. §§2000e-S(I)(I) and (3). 4. At all relevant times, Defendant, Flint Ink Corporation (the "Employer"), has continuously been a Michigan corporation doing business in the State of Michigan and the City of Ann Arbor, and has continuously had at least IS employees. S. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701 (b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§2000e(b), (g) and (h). 6. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has acted directly or indirectly as an employer in relation to employees and has continuously been an employer ofemployees within the meaning ofSection 3(d) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §203(d). 7. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has continuously employed employees engaged in commerce or in production ofgoods for commerce within the meaning ofSection 3(b),(i) and (j) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §203(b), (i) and (j), or has been continuously been an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production ofgoods for commerce within the meaning ofSection 3(r)
•

and (s) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §203(r)and (s), in that said enterprise has continuously been and is now an enterprise whose annual gross volume of sales made or business done is not less than $500,000.
CONCILlA TJON 8. Before commencement of this lawsuit, the Commission's representatives attempted to eliminate the alleged unlawful employment practices through informal methods of conciliation, conference and persuasion within the meaning of Section 706 (b) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e5(b).
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 9. More than thirty days before the commencement of this lawsuit, Barbara Mark filed a charge with the Commission alleging violations ofTitle VII and the Equal Pay Act by Defendant Employer. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 10. Since at least August of 1998, Defendant Employer engaged in unlawful employment practices at its Ann Arbor, Michigan facility by discriminating against Barbara Mark and Colleen Dalton with respect to their compensation, terms, conditions and privileges of employment in violation ofSection 703(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(a). 11. The effect of the practices complained ofabove has been to deprive Mark and Dalton of equal compensation, terms, conditions and privileges of employment and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their sex. 12. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 10 above were and are intentional. 13. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 10 above were and are done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Barbara Mark

and Colleen Dalton. 14. Since at least March 1999, Defendant Employer has violated Sections 6(d)(I) and
15(a)(2) ofthe FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 206(d)(I) and 215(a)(2), by paying wages to female employees in Ann Arbor, Michigan at rates less than the rates paid to employees ofthe opposite sex in the same establishment for equal work on jobs, the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility and which are performed under similar working conditions. Specifically, Defendant paid Barbara Mark and Colleen Dalton and continues to pay Colleen Dalton, Graphic Technologists within the Printing Research Laboratory, at a rate less than comparable male Graphic Technologists within the same Printing Research Laboratory.
15. As a result of the acts complained ofabove, Defendant Employer unlawfully has withheld and is continuing to withhold the payment ofequal wages due to Barbara Mark and Colleen Dalton.
16. The unlawful practices complained of in paragraph 14 were and are willful. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Wherefore, the Commission requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining the Defendant Employer, its officers, successors, assigns and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from discriminating within any of its establishments between employees on the basis of sex, by paying wages to employees at rates less than the rates at which it pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in the same establishment for equal work onjobs the performance ofwhich requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions. B. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out policies, practices and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for women, and which eradicate the effects ofits past

and present unlawful employment practices. C. Order Defendant Employer to provide all personnel responsible for hiring with
mandatory training regarding the Equal Pay Act and its prohibition against paying female employees less than male employees for the performance of substantially equal work.
D. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Mark and Dalton by providing appropriate backpay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be proved at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects ofits unlawful employment practices, including but not limited to rightful-place pay increases of the aggrieved individuals.
E. Grant ajudgment requiring Defendant Employer to pay appropriate back wages in an amount to be proved at trial, and an equal sum as liquidated damages or prejudgment interest in lieu thereof, to Mark and Dalton, the employees whose wages are being unlawfully withheld as a result of the acts complained ofabove.
F. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Mark by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraph 10 above in amounts to be proven at trial.
G. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Mark by providing compensation for past and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraph 10 above in amounts to be proven at trial.
H. Order Defendant Employer to pay Mark and Dalton punitive damages for its malicious or reckless conduct described in paragraph 10 above in amounts to be proven at trial.
I. Grant such further reliefas this Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest. J. Award the Commission its costs of this action.
JURY TRIAL AND DEMAND

The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint.
NICHOLAS M. INZEO Acting Deputy General Counsel
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 1801 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20507

Date: _'3......,/~'-'-Irl0. -,,-)-_

Adele Rapport (P4 Regional Attorney
Stanley H. Pitts (P33519) Supervisory Trial Attorney
Krystal M. Gardner (P54495) Trial Attorney
DETROIT DISTRICT OFFICE Patrick V. McNamara Building 477 Michigan Ave., Room 865 Detroit, Michigan 48226 (313) 226-6701

 
 I' "

••• 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRIC~ T ICHIGAN

SOUTHERN ,,{ON J;:: Zi..

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

_ , ,- - r'
: '.

Plaintiff,

Civil No. 02-40075

v.

Honorable Paul V. Gadola

FLINT INK CORPORATION,

 _

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

Defendant.
_______

_

_

_

_

_

_-J

fDJ~(C~D~fE~
In If'U CL JAN , 6 2003 ~

Adele Rapport (P44833)

U s EAK's OFFICE
Timothy K. Carroll (Pl107B1STRICT COURT

Stanley H. Pitts (P335 (9)

John W. Smith (P60337)

Krystal M. Gardner (PS4495)

Attorneys for Defendant

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Dykema Gossett PLLC

Patrick V. McNamara Bldg.

400 Renaissance Center

477 Michigan Avenue, Rm 865

Detroit, MI 48243-1668

Detroit, MI 48226

(313)568-6800

(313)226-5670
------------------------------~I

CONSENT DECREE

Plaintiff, the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("the

Commission"). filed this action on March 22. 2002. in the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division. The Commission alleges that Defendant Flint Ink

Corp. engaged in discriminatory conduct by paying Barbara Mark (female) and Colleen Dalton

(female), Printing Research Laboratory employees, a lower salary than it paid to male Printing

Research Laboratory employees although performing substantially equal work. The Commission

further alleges that Flint Ink was aware of the wage disparity, yet it continued to pay the female

1
1

workers less than their male counterparts. As a result of settlement discussions, the Commission and Flint Ink have resolved their
differences and have agreed that this action should be settled. It is the intent of the parties that this Decree be a final and binding settlement in full disposition of all claims alleged against Flint Ink or which could have been alleged against Flint Ink in the complaint filed by the Commission on behalf of Mark and Dalton.
STIPUJ,ATED FACTS The Commission is the agency of the United States government authorized by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, ("Title VII") and the Equal Pay Act of 1963, as amended ("EPA") to investigate allegations of unlawful employment discrimination based on unequal payment of wages, to bring civil actions to prohibit unlawful practices, and to seek relief for individuals affected by such practices. Pursuant to Title VII and the EPA, the panies acknowledge the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Eastern District ofMichigan, Southern Division, over the subject matter and the parties to this case for the purpose of entering this Decree and, if necessary, enforcing this Decree. Venue is appropriate in the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division. For purposes of this Decree and any proceedings related to this Decree only, Flint Ink agrees that all statutory conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit against Flint Ink have been fulfilled.
FINDINGS Having examined the terms and provisions of the Consent Decree and based on the pleadings, records, and stipulations of the parties, the Court finds the following:
2

a. The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matterofthe action and the parties to this action.
b. The terms and provisions of this Consent Decree are fair, reasonable and just. The rights ofAint Ink and the Commission are protected adequately by this Decree.
c. This Consent Decree conforms with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and is not in derogation of the rights and privileges of any person. The entry of this Consent Decree will further the objectives of Title VII, the EPA and other applicable laws and will be in the best interests of the parties and those for whom the Commission seeks relief.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY DECREED AS FOLLOWS: NON·ADMISSION
This Decree shall not constitute an adjudication or finding on the merits of the case and shall not be construed as an admission by Aint Ink of any violation of Title VII, Title lor the EPA.
NON·DlSCRIMINATION Flint Ink, its officers, agents, employees, successors, assigns and all persons in active concert or participation with them or any of them, shall comply with the provisions of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
NON·RETALIATION Aint Ink shall not take any action against any person which constitutes intimidation, retaliation, harassment or interference with the exercise of such person's rights under federal law because of the filing ofthe charge ofdiscrimination with the Commission, which forms the basis for
3

the present case, or because such person gave assistance or participated in any manner in any investigation or proceeding in connection with this case under the EPA and Title Vll.
MONETARY COMPENSATION Aint Ink shall pay monetary damages to Barbara Mark and Colleen Dalton in the amount of $120,000 in the aggregate, less applicable state and federal income tax withholdings. The checks, in amounts determined by the Commission, shall be made payable to Mark and Dalton and mailed directly to Mark and Dalton by certified mail within ten (10) days after the order of dismissal has been entered by the Court or ten (10) days after receipt by Aint Ink ofexecuted releases, in the form attached hereto, whichever is later. A photocopy of the check and a photocopy of the certified mail receipt shall be mailed to Adele Rapport, Regional Attorney, 477 Michigan Avenue, Room 865, Detroit, Michigan 48226.
TRAINING Aint Ink shall provide mandatory training to managerial personnel at its facility in Ann Arbor, Michigan, who provide meaningful input in determining employee wages or salaries. The training shall detail the requirements ofTitle VII and the EPA. In particular, the training will provide an explanation of the EPA's requirement that employers pay equal wages to male and female workers who perform substantially equal work, and Title Vll's prohibition of wage discrimination based on sex. The Commission shall have the right to review the Title VII and EPA training utilized by Flint Ink to assure that it contains the components set forth in the above paragraph. Such training shall be completed within twelve (12) months after this Decree has been filed with the Court. Upon completion of the training, Aintlnk shall certify to the Commission the specific training which was
4

•
undertaken and shall provide the Commission with a roster of all persons in attendance. DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND COMPLIANCE
The Court shall retain jurisdiction and will have all available equitable powers, including injunctive relief, to enforce this Decree. Upon motion of either party, the Court may schedule a hearing for the purpose of reviewing compliance with this Decree. The parties shall engage in a good faith effort to resolve any dispute as to compliance before seeking review by the Court. and shall be required to give notice to each other ten (10) days before moving for such review.
COURT COSTS AND ATTORNEY FEES All parties shall bear their own costs and expenses of litigation, including attorneys fees.
SEVERA BlUTY If any provision of this Decree is found to be unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, only the specific provision in question shall be affected, and the other enforceable provisions shall remain in full force and effect.
MISCELLANEOUS The terms of this Consent Decree shall be binding upon the present and future owners, officers, directors, agents. trustees, administrators, successors, representatives. and assigns of Flint Ink. This agreement constitutes the entire agreement and commitments of the panies. Any modifications to this Decree must be mutually agreed upon and memorialized in a writing signed by authorized representatives of Flint Ink and the Commission. Any documents submilled by Flint Ink to the Commission pursuant to this Decree shall be mailed by certified mail to Adele Rapport. Regional Attorney, EEOC. Detroit District Office. 477 Michigan Avenue, Room 865. Patrick V. McNamara Building. Detroit, Michigan 48226.
5

•

TERM OF DECREE/CONCLUSION

This Decree shall remain in effect for one year from the date of its execution by Flint Ink

Corp. The terms of this Decree have been fully reviewed by the appropriate officials of the

Commission and Flint Ink. and both the Commission and Flint Ink enter into the Decree knowingly

and voluntarily. with a firm understanding of both the rights they are giving up and the obligations

they are undertaking by this Decree.

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

FLINT INK CORPORATION

NICHOLAS INZEO Acting Deputy General Counsel

GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel
Regional Attomey STANLEY H. PITTS {P335 19) KRYSTAL M. GARDNER (P54495)

u~
TIMOTHY K. CARROll. (PI 1671) JOHN W. SMITH (P60337)

DETROIT DISTRICf OFFICE Patrick V. McNamara Federal Bldg. Rm 865 477 Michigan Ave., Detroit. Ml48226 (313) 226·5670
Dated: Jfl4~. " cJOol

Attomeys for Defendant 400 Renaissance Center Detroit. Michigan 48243·1668 (313) 568·6800
D"," ~ ", ., ••,

IT IS SO ORDERED:

\ I}.rv\O, ?
Date

United States District Judge

6

 
 CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:mied - Docket Report

https://ecf.mied.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?185182833020257-L_3...

U.S. District Court Eastern District of Michigan (Flint) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:02-cv-40075-PVG

CLOSED, SDP

EEOC v. Flint Ink Corp Assigned to: Judge Paul V Gadola Demand: $0
Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
V. Defendant Flint Ink Corporation

Date Filed: 03/22/2002 Date Terminated: 01/22/2003 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff
represented by Krystal M. Gardner 645 Griswold Suite1300 Detroit, MI 48226 313-999-9713` LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Timothy K. Carroll Dykema Gossett (Ann Arbor) 2723 S. State Street Suite 400 Ann Arbor, MI 48104 734-214-7660 Fax: 734-214-7660 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 03/22/2002 04/22/2002 04/22/2002 04/22/2002

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT; jury demand (pm) (Entered: 03/27/2002)
2 ANSWER by defendant Flint Ink Corp to complaint [1-1] (pm) (Entered: 04/24/2002)
2 AFFIRMATIVE defenses by defendant Flint Ink Corp (pm) (Entered: 04/24/2002)
4 PROOF of service by defendant Flint Ink Corp of [2-1] by mail (pm) (Entered: 04/26/2002)

1 of 2

6/5/2007 10:36 AM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:mied - Docket Report

https://ecf.mied.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?185182833020257-L_3...

04/23/2002 08/15/2002 08/26/2002
01/22/2003

3 NOTICE of setting scheduling conference for 2:00 6/5/02 (pm) (Entered: 04/24/2002)
5 NOTICE of setting scheduling conference for 2:00 8/28/02 (pm) (Entered: 08/19/2002)
6 PRETRIAL scheduling order by Judge Paul V. Gadola - setting deadline for discovery for 2/28/03 , setting deadline for witness list for 1/3/03 , setting deadline for filing dispositive motions for 3/21/03 , setting deadline for final pretrial order for 6/23/03 , setting final pretrial conference for 6/30/03 , setting trailing trial docket for 7/7/03 (pm) (Entered: 08/30/2002)
7 CONSENT decree entered by Judge Paul V. Gadola [EOD Date: 1/30/03] (pm) (Entered: 01/30/2003)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

06/05/2007 11:36:13

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code:

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

Billable Pages: 1

Cost:

eeoc 4:02-cv-40075-PVG 0.08

2 of 2

6/5/2007 10:36 AM

 
 EEOC LITIGATION SETTLEMENT REPORT - JANUARY 2003

http://www.eeoc.gov/litigation/settlements/settlement01-03.html

EEOC v. Flint Ink Corporation No. 02-40075 (E.D. Mich. January 22, 2003)
The Detroit District Office alleged in this Title VII/EPA action that defendant, a manufacturer and distributor of publication, commercial and packaging inks, paid two female employees working in the Printing Research Laboratory lower wages than it paid male laboratory employees although the workers performed substantially equal work. Despite having more relevant work experience, the two female claimants were paid less than three similarly situated male comparators. The case was resolved through a consent decree which provides for a total payment of $120,000 to the two women.

1 of 1

6/5/2007 10:46 AM