About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

8 Ga. L. Rev. 781 (1973-1974)
The Back Pay Remedy in Title VII Class Actions: Problems of Procedure

handle is hein.journals/geolr8 and id is 783 raw text is: The Back Pay Remedy in Title VII Class Actions: Problems of Procedure Charles A. Edwards* The class action for back pay has developed as a significant factor in employment discrimination litigation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The requirement in such suits that each class member demonstrate his own entitlement to back pay poses problems of notice and the res judicata effect of judgments under federal class action procedure. In this Arti- cle, Mr. Edwards examines the development of such problems and proposes a bifurcated trial procedure as a method for han- dling class actions for back pay. Mr. Edwards concludes the Article by analyzing notice, discovery and settlement proce- dures in the context of the bifuicated trial. p erhaps the most significant development in the law of la- bor relations in recent years has been the awarding of back pay in class actions to large numbers of persons who have been victims of discriminatory employment practices.' In part because of difficul- ties inherent in any litigation involving large groups of people in diverse circumstances and in part because of the unique nature of the class action back pay remedy, problems of procedure and proof have accompanied this movement. After sketching the relevant provisions of Title VII and Rule 23 and outlining the development of the back pay remedy in class actions, this Article will discuss the requisites to individual entitle- ment to back pay. It will then consider problems which have been engendered by the courts' decisions to grant back pay in class ac- tions, and suggest possible methods for dealing with such problems. *Hunter, Houlihan, Maclean, Exley, Dunn & Connerat, P.C., Savannah, Georgia. A.B., Davidson College, 1967; J.D., University of North Carolina, 1970. Member of the Georgia Bar. IThe importance of this development is indicated by the sums of money involved in employment discrimination suits. For example, American Telephone & Telegraph Co. paid $38,000,000 in a consent decree to conciliate all racial and sex discrimination claims. See EEOC v. American Tel. & Tel. Co., 365 F. Supp. 1105 (E.D. Pa. 1973); 2 CCH 1973 Ewi. PRAc. GUIDE 5133, 5135.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most