Novartis Gender Discrimination Class Action Case Study

2
The Case In Velez et. al. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. DOAR represented the plaintiffs in a gender discrimi- nation class action lawsuit in federal court. DOAR’s client, Sanford, Wittels & Heisler, LLP, represented a class of 5,600 female sales representatives at Novartis Pharmaceuticals who alleged that female employees were discriminated against in pay, promotion and pregnancy-related treatment in a trial before Judge Colleen McMahon in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. A Discovery-to-Decision Solution Because DOAR was brought in on the eve of trial after discov- ery was long closed, the consulting team focused on advis- ing the trial team on how to most effectively use the voluminous amount of documents they had accumulated during discovery. Analytical Graphics In order to prove that the gender discrimination incidents were not isolated incidents, graphics were used to show the pervasiveness of the problems at the company. Analytical graphics were devel- oped to support the testimony of plaintiff expert witnesses in order to simplify complex statistical testimony to educate the jurors on the flawed evaluation process that enabled discriminatory behav- ior in terms of pay and promotion. Graphics also clarified expert tes- timony on the statistical analysis of how promotions and pay were skewed throughout the company. The jury was therefore able to un- derstand and weigh the import of very high-level statistical analysis. In order to demonstrate that the company had been well aware of its systemic problems with discrimination, the consulting team advised the trial team on what types of documents could be used to concretely show the company’s knowledge. The team therefore showed a vari- ety of emails, performance evaluations, human resources department records and internal memos to visually support witness testimony. www.DOAR.com | Tel: 1-800-875-8705 | Fax: 516-823-4400 The Challenge In order to establish that there was a pattern or practice of gender discrimination, a jury must make a leap from the anecdotal evidence of individual witnesses to seeing a broad, unwritten, systemic corporate structure that tolerates or encourages discriminatory behavior. In this case, there were also relatively few instances in which woman reported discriminatory problems to their human resources department.

description

Novartis Gender Discrimination Class Action Case Study

Transcript of Novartis Gender Discrimination Class Action Case Study

Page 1: Novartis Gender Discrimination Class Action Case Study

The Case

In Velez et. al. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. DOAR represented the plaintiffs in a gender discrimi- nation class action lawsuit in federal court. DOAR’s client, Sanford, Wittels & Heisler, LLP, represented a class of 5,600 female sales representatives at Novartis Pharmaceuticals who alleged that female employees were discriminated against in pay, promotion and pregnancy-related treatment in a trial before Judge Colleen McMahon in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

A Discovery-to-Decision SolutionBecause DOAR was brought in on the eve of trial after discov-ery was long closed, the consulting team focused on advis-ing the trial team on how to most effectively use the voluminous amount of documents they had accumulated during discovery.

Analytical GraphicsIn order to prove that the gender discrimination incidents were not isolated incidents, graphics were used to show the pervasiveness of the problems at the company. Analytical graphics were devel-oped to support the testimony of plaintiff expert witnesses in order to simplify complex statistical testimony to educate the jurors on the flawed evaluation process that enabled discriminatory behav-ior in terms of pay and promotion. Graphics also clarified expert tes-timony on the statistical analysis of how promotions and pay were skewed throughout the company. The jury was therefore able to un-derstand and weigh the import of very high-level statistical analysis.

In order to demonstrate that the company had been well aware of its systemic problems with discrimination, the consulting team advised the trial team on what types of documents could be used to concretely show the company’s knowledge. The team therefore showed a vari-ety of emails, performance evaluations, human resources department records and internal memos to visually support witness testimony.

www.DOAR.com | Tel: 1-800-875-8705 | Fax: 516-823-4400

The Challenge

In order to establish that there was a pattern or practice of gender discrimination, a jury must make a leap from the anecdotal evidence of individual witnesses to seeing a broad, unwritten, systemic corporate structure that tolerates or encourages discriminatory behavior. In this case, there were also relatively few instances in which woman reported discriminatory problems to their human resources department.

Page 2: Novartis Gender Discrimination Class Action Case Study

A Discovery-to-Decision Solution continued

Trial PresentationAlthough the trial team had not previously used multimedia trial presen-tation, the consulting team worked closely with them so that they could comfortably and seamlessly show the jurors a vast array of documents, physical exhibits, as well as video witness testimony.

The trial team quickly became adept at integrating these forms of evi-dence into their opening, closing, and direct and cross examinations.

Jury ConsultingExtensive witness preparation was done in DOAR’s Digital Courtroom while the trial was ongoing to help all of the testifying witnesses and ex-perts present themselves most clearly and persuasively in the stressful environment of the actual courtroom.

With information from the varied reactions of the focus group partici-pants, a consultant assisted the trial team in voir dire. The resulting jury, as the judge later noted, was quite thoughtful and diligent, congenial and happy to work together.

Throughout the trial and deliberations, the consulting team provided ongoing live trial strategy analysis and recommendations, including considering the status of the deliberations through the consideration of juror behaviors and notes sent to the judge.

The Outcome

By forging a relationship with the consulting team, the trial team was able to add-on the DOAR consultants as a surgical strike trial strategy team. The trial team took full advantage of DOAR’s ability to help with the develop-ment of a persuasive case narrative with accompanying multimedia, and the selection of a perfect jury to hear the story.

The jury found Novartis liable for discriminating against women in pay, promotions to entry-level manage-ment, and pregnancy-related treatment. The jurors awarded approximately $3.3 million in individual com-pensatory damages to the twelve named plaintiffs and $250 million in punitive damages to the class.

www.DOAR.com | Tel: 1-800-875-8705 | Fax: 516-823-4400