AARP Attorneys Join Age Discrimination Lawsuit Against Seagate

Source: AARP.org

AARP attorneys announced that they have joined as co-counsel in the case Peterson v. Seagate US LLC, et al., a class action age discrimination lawsuit against Seagate Technology. 

Approximately 58 former employees of Seagate Technology, a California-based employer with a facility in Longmont, will begin receiving notice this week of their eligibility to participate in the age discrimination lawsuit against the information technology company.

A majority of the workers to receive notice were terminated in 2004 from jobs in Minnesota, although some workers who lost jobs at Seagate facilities in California, Colorado and other states will also be eligible to join the lawsuit.

AARP attorneys recently joined Minneapolis-based employment lawyers as co-counsel for twenty former Seagate employees named as plaintiffs and others “similarly situated” who may decide to join the suit.  AARP Attorney Dan Kohrman stated that  “AARP is very troubled by the allegations in this case of Seagate’s unfair treatment of older workers, especially because of the large number of older workers involved and because the federal court has already determined that Seagate's release violated federal law and was invalid."

Background on Peterson v Seagate
Peterson v. Seagate US LLC, et al., was filed in May 2007 in federal district court in Minneapolis.  The suit alleges that Seagate engaged in a pattern and practice of age discrimination in connection with its termination of employees as a result of a nationwide reduction-in-force conducted in 2004.  In October 2008, the court ordered that former employees who were over age 40 when terminated in 2004 be notified of their right to “opt-in” or join the suit.  On Jan. 8, 2009 the court approved the specific notice to be sent to former Seagate employees.

Court papers filed by twenty “named plaintiffs” assert that Seagate violated the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) in a variety of ways, including by:

• Pressuring older workers to retire and firing older workers who refused to do so;
• Transferring duties and jobs from older workers to younger, less qualified replacements;
• Telling older workers falsely that their jobs had been eliminated;
• Hiring younger workers shortly before and after firing older workers, and;
• Transferring younger workers affected by workforce reductions into open positions, but not doing so for equally qualified older workers. 

In addition, in May 2008, the court ruled that a release Seagate required terminated workers to sign in order to receive certain severance benefits was invalid because it violated the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA).  The OWBPA is a federal law that regulates the manner in which firms may ask older workers to waive their rights under the ADEA.  Hence, in the Seagate case, both eligible workers who signed a release and those who did not may opt-in to the lawsuit.

For more information, contact Morie Smile at 303/764-5990 or toll-free at 1-866-554-5376.