Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA v. UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION (11/01/73)

decided: November 1, 1973.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, PENNSYLVANIA HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION, PLAINTIFF,
v.
UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION, AMERICAN BRIDGE DIVISION, SHIFFLER WORKS, DEFENDANT



Original jurisdiction in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, v. United States Steel Corporation, American Bridge Division, Shiffler Works.

COUNSEL

Rajeshwar Kumar, for plaintiff.

S. G. Clark, Jr., with him James T. Carney, for defendant.

J. Thomas Menaker, with him James H. Stewart, Jr., and Nauman, Smith, Shissler & Hall, for amicus curiae.

President Judge Bowman and Judges Crumlish, Jr., Kramer, Wilkinson, Jr., Mencer, Rogers and Blatt. Opinion by President Judge Bowman.

Author: Bowman

[ 10 Pa. Commw. Page 409]

Before us are preliminary objections of United States Steel (USS) to a complaint in equity by the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission seeking enforcement of an order it had previously issued to USS to answer extensive interrogatories.

[ 10 Pa. Commw. Page 410]

To delineate the issues raised by the preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer contesting both the jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the complaint and the jurisdiction of a court of equity, a recitation of the background leading to the filing of this complaint in equity is necessary. Although not averred in the Commission's complaint, it is undisputed and we take judicial notice of public records which are the genesis of subsequent Commission action leading to the present controversy.

In 1971, the Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) compiled a list of some 85 Pennsylvania employers which, based upon percentages of women and minority groups employed by a particular employer measured by comparable percentages in area census figures, it found to be appropriate subjects for affirmative action programs. Based upon this report EEOC submitted to our Pennsylvania Commission an EEOC Project Report -- Analysis of Targets.*fn1 USS is

[ 10 Pa. Commw. Page 411]

    one of the employers listed and "targeted" for suggested action by our Pennsylvania Commission.

Acting on its own initiative, on August 21, 1972, the Commission filed with itself a formal complaint against USS alleging it to have violated Section 5 of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act of October 27, 1955, P.L. 744, as amended, 43 P.S. ยง 955, in that USS ". . . has in the past and continues until the present time to maintain a discriminatory system of recruitment, hiring, training, employment, compensation, promotion, demotion, job assignment or placement, transfer, lay off, retention, referral, dismissal, rehire, retirement, and pensions, and has otherwise discriminated in the past ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.