Penn faces lawsuit for alleged racial bias

African-American employees of the University Laboratory Animal Resources Department are suing the University for "ongoing racial discrimination" dating back to 1975. The 34 plaintiffs -- either animal husbandry technicians, supervisors or managers -- allege that ULAR has practiced racial discrimination in promotion and disciplinary practices. The lawsuit claims that ULAR has precluded African Americans from advancing to higher-paying positions. It also alleges that African-American supervisors and managers are pressured to discipline African-American technicians, but not their white and Asian coworkers. Additionally, the plaintiffs allege that 95 percent of ULAR's animal husbandry technicians are African American, while 95 percent of the research technicians -- a higher paying position -- are white or Asian. "I and other ULAR Animal Care Technicians... are steered and relegated to Animal Care Technician positions... not promoted to higher positions as expeditiously as our non-African-American counterparts, despite our qualifications, even after out managers have recommended promotions," one of the plaintiffs wrote in a statement to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. "[We are] subjected to disciplinary actions, including discharge, at a rate disproportionately higher than that of our non-African-American research technician and clinical staff colleagues," the plaintiff continued. The case was presented to the EEOC, as is standard procedure in any race discrimination case. The plaintiffs, however, were presented last September with a "Dismissal and Notice of Rights" in which the EEOC wrote that they were "unable to conclude that the information obtained establishes violations of the statutes." The University has denied all of these allegations. "We consider the allegations to be completely without merit, and the EEOC found them to be without merit as well," University spokeswoman Phyllis Holtzman said. "We will defend vigorously against the lawsuit." Neither the plaintiffs nor their lawyer, Vivienne Crawford, could be reached for comment. ULAR Director Jeffrey Linn declined to comment. The case was originally filed in the District Court of Common Pleas on February 13. However, it was removed to federal court by Penn on February 28 because it addresses Title VII, a federal law that prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Penn also filed a motion to dismiss on March 5, asking the judge to throw out the case as a matter of law, concluding that the plaintiffs are not entitled to compensation regardless of whether their allegations are correct. "It is our hope that the case will be thrown out before it ever gets to court," Associate University General Counsel Bob Bohner said. "Even so, we expect we would prevail." Bohner added that if the motion to dismiss fails, the case will progress to a fact-finding period. After the discovery period, Penn will have the opportunity to ask for dismissal based on summary judgement, when a judge can decide that no reasonable jury could find for the plaintiffs based on the facts. In addition to race discrimination, the lawsuit alleges that the animal husbandry technicians are forced to work in facilities which house two to three times more animals than their intended capacity, resulting in a "stressful, oppressive and unsafe" environment."