Document: 446 U.S. 318 100 S.Ct. 1698 64 L.Ed.2d 319 GENERAL TELEPHONE COMPANY OF THE NORTHWEST, INC., et al., Petitioners,v.EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION al. No. 79-488. Argued March 25, 26, 1980. Decided May 12, Syllabus * Section 706(a) of Title VII the Civil Rights Act 1964 empowers Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) "to prevent any person from engaging in unlawful practice" as set forth VII. 706(f)(1) authorizes EEOC, after employment practice charges against a private employer are filed with it and is unable to secure conciliation agreement, bring civil action employer. And § 706(g), addition providing for injunctive relief, provides reinstatement or hiring aggrieved employees without backpay. On basis sex discrimination by four petitioner employer, EEOC brought suit Federal District Court under 706(f)(1), alleging female States seeking relief backpay women affected challenged practices. The did not seek class certification pursuant Rule Procedure 23, moved dismiss aspects complaint. denied motion Appeals, on interlocutory appealed, affirmed. Held : may classwide being certified representative 23. Pp. 323-325. (a) language §§ 706(a), (f)(1), (g) clearly procedure that followed this case. (b) This understanding statute supported purpose 1972 amendments securing more effective enforcement adding authorize supplement pre-existing action. Under Congress sought implement public interest well about rights. rights suggest merely proxy victims EEOC's suits should be considered actions subject When acts, albeit at behest benefit specific individuals, acts also vindicate preventing discrimination. 325-326. (c) Prior 1972, only authorized other than lawsuits were Attorney General upon reasonable cause suspect "a pattern discrimination, such name United States- persons aggrieved- obtaining 23 even though was awarded individuals parties suit. transferred General's authority "pattern intended proceed same manner. 327-329. (d) Forcing into model would many cases distort commonly interpreted others foreclose satisfying prevailing standards numerosity, commonality, typicality, adequacy representation but seemingly 706(f)(1). undesirability doing either supports conclusion procedural requirements do apply. 329-331. (e) Departure statutory design warranted theory invoked order judgment will binding all similar grievances subclasses might certified. It consistent remedial statutes bind "class" members an obtained settlement especially view possible differences between interests involved. However, courts powerless undue hardship defendant, where has prevailed its action, court reasonably require individual who claims relinquish his right separate 332-333. 599 F.2d 322, Lawrence G. Wallace, Washington, D.C., respondents. James R. Dickens, Seattle, Wash., petitioners. Mr. Justice WHITE delivered opinion Court. 1 issue case whether (Title VII) Rules Procedure. Appeals Ninth Circuit held required. 322 (1979). Because recurring which federal divided,1 we granted certiorari, 444 989, 518, 62 418 We affirm judgment. 2 Four Telephone Company Northwest, Inc. (General Telephone), complaining employment. After investigation, found women, April 1977 Western Washington VII, amended, 4, 86 Stat. 105, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5 (f)(1).2 named defendants subsidiary, West Coast California, (hereinafter collectively referred bargaining agent, Local Union 89, International Brotherhood Electrical Workers. complaint alleged Telephone's facilities Idaho, Montana, Oregon, form restrictions maternity leave, access craft jobs, promotion managerial positions; 3 mention 23,3 Rule. In August 1977, 42(b) "for bifurcating liability damages." Magistrate, see 706(f)(5), dismissing aspects" complaint.4 4 Magistrate concluded required comply recommended denied. adopted recommendation, dismiss, then appeal Circuit. accepted appeal, 28 1292(b), affirmed Court's ruling. II 5 agree applicable own 706 practices.5 rely legislative intent underlying procedures prior amendments. 6 protects applicants covered agency, labor organization, training program based race, color, religion, sex, national origin. . Title. specifically respondent governmental entity failure acceptable agreement,6 terminate practices appropriate including "reinstatement , back pay," See 706(g). 7 thus itself Upon finding believe had discriminated employees, permanent injunction discriminatory practices, eradicate effect past "make whole" backpay, interest, adversely Given clear jurisdiction over enforcement, remedies available, need look no further purpose, among others, group individuals. Its way dependent application 8 Of course, welcome prospect liability; law sue it. Moreover, here requested behalf "those affected" "in amount proved trial." App. 11. There claim suggestion unjustified, windfall awards. That imposing framework follow straightforward reading statute, seems us enforce those injured forbidden Act. B 9 authority. amendments, plainly enough, As originally enacted part 1964, role eliminating limited "informal methods conference, conciliation, persuasion." inability voluntary compliance could person. 706(e), 78 260. became convinced, however, "failure grant meaningful powers proven major flaw operation VII."7 S.Rep. 92-415, p. (1971). accordingly expanded authorizing district employers suspected violating so doing, transfer assign agency exclusively task protecting interests. supplement, replace, Cf. Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co., 415 36, 45, 94 1011, 1018, 39 147 (1974). bear primary burden litigation, previously available superseded. expiration 180-day period exclusive administrative if failed move along party's satisfaction, reached determination sue, agreement party finds unsatisfactory. intervene These private-action Although can reinstatement, constructive seniority, damages benefits denied, victims, guided "the overriding equal opportunity asserted through direct enforcement." 118 Cong.Rec. 4941 (1972). discrimination.8 C 10 depend filing charge EEOC; nor they designed advance personal particular Department numerous 707 pattern-or-practice suits. 4080 (1972) (remarks Sen. Williams). none ever suggested sued capacity must 23;9 true suit.10 11 party, motion. discussing transfer,11 Senator Hruska described nature actions." Williams noted that, transfer, "[t]here difference section 'pattern practice' [EEOC] able bring." Id., 4081. Javits agreed both Senators: "The institute exactly does practice."12 "if [the EEOC] proceeds suit, If position what [T]he power fully qualifies take precisely now taken Justice." 4081-4082. have said, 23—it aggrieved—and assume Congress' familiarity procedure. manner; thus, given context, similarly references debate availability actions.13 III 12 apparent forcing our A. 13 23(a), n. 3, supra, imposes prerequisites representation. light these requirements, apply law. Some obvious severe problems worth noting. 14 numerosity requirement requires examination facts each absolute limitations. applies few 15 employees. judged size putative various been minimum too small meet requirement.14 cases, applying join despite solely name. typicality said limit fairly encompassed plaintiff's claims. actions, seem counterpart plaintiff charging serving stead class. Yet Courts presented parties. Any violations ascertains course investigation actionable. See, e. g., Electric 532 359, 366 (CA4 1976); McLean Trucking 525 1007, 1010 (CA6 1975). latter approach far strictures typified party. 16 note finally adequate-representation typically construed there conflict conflicts arise, example, will, compete fringe seniority. represent classes. But unlike representative, unified obtain most satisfactory overall competing involved groups appear disadvantaged. victim very reason. exists remedying making hard choices exist. reluctant, absent congressional guidance, disable advancing manner extent contemplated statute. 17 observe urge expectation hope forced drop Telephone. Indeed, petitioners proper requirements. Brief Petitioners 16-22. understand, petitioners' objective invoke aimed sensitive importance res judicata judgments, free depart be. 18 related context interface collective-bargaining (1974), employee forfeit invoking grievance arbitration contract. "federal assigned plenary VII." S.Ct., 1018. Similarly, retain violated. McDonnell Douglas Corp. Green, 411 792, 798-799, 93 1817, 1822-1823, 36 668 (1973). stressed strong provide claimants: " 'The provisions subsection give wide discretion exercising their equitable fashion complete possible. .' 7168 (1972)." Albemarle Paper Co. Moody, 422 405, 421, 95 2362, 2373, 45 280 (1975). 19 retained "an essential means judicial VII," U.S., while giving broad powers. "general accord parallel overlapping discrimination," 47, 1019, unconvinced Occidental Life Ins. 432 355, 97 2447, 53 402 (1977). 20 courts, defendant perform accordingly. may, discovery pretrial proceedings, determine intends pursue Here, noted, try initially liability, avoid proving claims, postpone proof. goes saying preclude double recovery individual. 51, 14, 1021. Also, action.15 remedy one; equity adjust IV 21 hold, therefore, maintain first 23.16 22 Affirmed. CHIEF JUSTICE, POWELL, REHNQUIST, STEVENS, reasons stated Fifth D. H. Holmes Ltd., 556 787 (1977), cert. 436 962, 98 3082, 57 1129 (1978), reverse syllabus constitutes prepared Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Detroit Lumber 200 321, 337, 26 282, 287, 50 L.Ed. 499. addressed (1978). decided ways. pertinent part: "If within thirty days Commission, government, political subdivision charge. shall Commission. dismissed one hundred eighty reference (d), whichever later, entered notify ninety notice (A) claiming (B) member whom alleges practice." "(a) Prerequisites Class Action. One (1) joinder impracticable, (2) questions fact common class, (3) defenses typical (4) adequately protect "(b) Actions Maintainable. An maintained satisfied, addition: "(1) prosecution create risk "(A) inconsistent varying adjudications respect establish incompatible conduct opposing "(B) practical matter dispositive substantially impair impede ability interests; "(2) acted refused act grounds generally thereby final corresponding declaratory whole; "(3) predominate affecting members, superior fair efficient adjudication controversy. matters findings include: individually controlling defense actions; litigation concerning controversy already commenced class; (C) desirability concentrating forum; (D) difficulties likely encountered management action." Workers, Discussions underway union resolve allegations union. participate following denial dismiss. December 18, 1978, consent decree union; cross-claim liable still pending. petition certiorari is, 21(4). characterize "class action"; characterizes "affecting individuals." choose characterizations. however styled, Government whose charged entity. Senate Report notes: striking deficiency judicially enforceable orders up "As consequence, unless concludes resistance involved, rests go delay expense entails, promised him law." Committee proceeding cease-and-desist review appeals. floor amendment changed court, policy remained same. 368, 2455, (1977) ("[U]nder structure created function simply vehicle conducting parties; responsibility investigating settling disputes, possible, informal, noncoercive fashion"). Porter Warner Holding 328 395, 397-398, 66 1086, 1088-1089, 90 1332 (1946) (The Price Administrator "invoke[s] enjoin made illegal [Emergency Control 1942] .. [S]ince nature, Court's] broader flexible character when stake"). Nor since 1972. fact, hold intimated Circuit, although "emphatically situation rules thwart substantive whatsoever. "If, reason, below believes Company, recourse file ." F.2d, 8. Chesapeake & O. 471 582, 589-590 1972) (constructive seniority), sub nom. Railroad Trainmen States, 939, 1893, 401 (1973); St. Louis-S. F. 464 301, 309-311 (CA8 (en banc) (preferential Transportation 409 1107, 900, 34 687, 1116, 913, 700 Ironworkers 86, 443 544, 548, 552-554 (CA9) hiring), 404 984, 92 447, 30 367 Since suits, implicated. E. Edison 515 314-315 1975); Georgia Power 474 906, 919-920 (CA5 1973); cf. N. L. Industries, Inc., 479 354, 378-380 1973). nothing indicate result rested ground 311; Hayes Int'l Corp., 456 112, 121 1972). point focused make transfer. arose wake decision day before empower order. upon, occur two years date "[t]hese essentially claimant, claimants." juxtaposition discussion Justice's newly unclear Senator's characterization actions" 706. heavily statement immediately quotation out "this provided courts." elaborated: "I I refer rule rules, entitled give[s] engage properly suing ourselves permission party." 4082 Again, emerges comments compare procedure; impose idea full range completely comparisons, text, amended original version 707. Monarch Asphalt Sales Wilshire Oil Texas, 511 1073, 1077 (CA10 1975) (37 plaintiffs); Peterson Albert M. Bender 75 F.R.D. 661, 667 (ND Cal.1977) (35-45); Murray Norberg, 423 F.Supp. 795, 798 (RI 1976) (fewer 20); Chmieleski City Products 71 118, 150-151 (WD Mo.1976) (22); Lopez Jackson County Bd. Supervisors, 375 1194, 1196-1197 (SD Miss.1974) (16); Moreland Rucker Pharmacal 63 611, 613-614 La.1974) (26); Anderson Home Style Stores, 58 125, 130-131 (ED Pa.1972) (18). acceptance EEOC-negotiated drafted relinquishment. inapplicable actions. refers 53, discussed 54(c). 424, 2374, characterized action"

Category: 8