AT&T Can’t Escape Employee Age Discrimination Class Action Lawsuit

AT&T lost a bid to dismiss a class action lawsuit alleging the company discriminates against older workers.

Lead plaintiffs allege in their class action lawsuit that AT&T schemed on a company-wide level to remove older workers.

Further, said the plaintiffs, the severance package offered to them and proposed Class Members did not meet standards laid out in a federal law meant to protect older workers.

AT&T attempted to dodge the age discrimination class action lawsuit by arguing that the case couldn’t be brought in New Jersey because the company isn’t based there.

The judge pointed out in the court order that AT&T’s alleged discriminatory policy affected “residents of New Jersey and the claims in this matter [arise] out of these activities.”

According to the AT&T class action lawsuit, the plaintiffs, who are residents of various states including Arizona, Florida, and New Jersey, were systematically terminated from their employment under a “2020 Scheme” to remove older workers.

The AT&T workers allege that their positions were fraudulently terminated as surpluses under the scheme. Those who were under 40 years old were hired into available positions, say the plaintiffs, while older workers were not rehired.

AT&T attempted to argue that it did not have sufficient contacts in New Jersey for the New Jersey federal court to exercise jurisdiction. U.S. District Court Judge Brian R. Martinotti dismissed that argument.

The judge noted that AT&T and specifically the allegedly discriminatory scheme to rid itself of older workers as well as the severance pay plan affected the plaintiffs, some of whom are New Jersey residents.

“Plaintiffs have established INC purposefully directed activities (the 2020 Scheme) at New Jersey residents and the claims in this matter clearly arise out of the 2020 Scheme, which included the INC Severance Pay Plan,” states the order. “Moreover, personal jurisdiction is reasonable and fair because INC should have anticipate being hauled into court due to its Severance Pay Plan.”

Judge Martinotti did dismiss some of the AT&T class action lawsuit allegations. The judge trimmed one of the plaintiff’s claims over the severance agreement because she had signed the agreement that included an ADEA release.

The judge refused to toss the AT&T class action claims that all Class Members did the same work, but noted that it was unlikely the plaintiffs would be able to establish those claims.

The AT&T age discrimination class action lawsuit alleges that the plaintiffs and other potential Class Members are victims of a scheme by AT&T to replace older workers by 2020. They say that even the severance package offered under the 2020 scheme is unfair because it requires workers to sign away their right to a lawsuit in order to get the severance.

The plaintiffs are seeking damages as well as a court order forcing AT&T to notify ex-employees that accepting the severance package does not affect their right to file a lawsuit against the company.

The plaintiffs are represented by Stephen Console, Susan M. Saint-Antoine, Laura Mattiacci, Brian C. Farrell and Emily R. Derstine-Friesen of Console Mattiacci Law LLC.

The AT&T Age Discrimination Class Action Lawsuit is Roy Horowitz, et al. v. AT&T Inc., et al., Case No. 3:17-cv-04827, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.