Crockett v. Green

388 F. Supp. 912, 10 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 165
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin
DecidedFebruary 3, 1975
DocketCiv. A. 73-C-665
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 388 F. Supp. 912 (Crockett v. Green) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Wisconsin primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Crockett v. Green, 388 F. Supp. 912, 10 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 165 (E.D. Wis. 1975).

Opinion

OPINION AND ORDER

JOHN W. REYNOLDS, Chief Judge.

On December 12, 1973, the named plaintiff commenced this class action under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983 seeking declaratory and injunctive relief from certain employment practices of the defendant officials of the City of Milwaukee. Plaintiffs charge defendants with unlawfully denying blacks equal employment opportunities with respect *915 to “skilled craft” positions of the City of Milwaukee and the Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee. On December 19, 1973, the parties consented to the entry of a temporary restraining order enjoining defendants from permanently filling any positions in the skilled craft classification pending a decision on plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. On January 3, 1974, defendants answered denying unlawful discrimination.

Plaintiffs presently seek a preliminary injunction restraining the alleged discriminatory employment practices of the defendants with respect to the “skilled craft” positions and request the imposition of ratio hiring requirements to remedy the effects of the past discriminatory practices. This court’s jurisdiction is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1343(3) and (4) and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Declaratory relief is also sought under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202.

The factual basis for plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction is set forth in two stipulations of uncontested facts (hereinafter “stipulation”) and the verified complaint. The stipulations resolve all matters of factual controversy between the parties and constitute the basis of this court’s findings of fact. Based on the findings of fact, this court concludes that, as a matter of law, defendants have engaged in discrimination in the selection of skilled craft labor for the City of Milwaukee and the Board of School Directors, and that ratio hiring is necessary to remedy the effects of the past discriminatory practices of the defendants.

I. FINDINGS OF FACT

The named plaintiff, Edward C. Crockett, is a black adult and resident of the City of Milwaukee. On March 25, 1969, Crockett completed an apprenticeship at the trade of bricklayer and mason. Crockett was the first black to complete the apprenticeship in this trade in the City of Milwaukee. On September 22, 1973, Crockett was notified by the City Service Commission that a position was available as a bricklayer for the Milwaukee Board of School Directors. He immediately applied for the position and was thereafter advised that his application had been “reviewed and accepted.” Crockett was directed to report for a practical performance examination (Stipulation If 9). On December 7, 1973, Crockett was informed by the City that his application did not satisfy the experience requirement for bricklayers and therefore his application would not be accepted. On December 8, 1973, Crockett went to the location for the practical performance examination and was again advised that he would not be permitted to take the examination because he did not have five years’ experience as a journeyman bricklayer after completion of an apprenticeship. 1 On December 12, 1973, Crockett commenced this action on behalf of himself and others similarly situated. On May 3, 1974, this court granted Crockett’s motion for maintainability of the action as a class action pursuant to Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure^ on behalf of the class defined as follows: all blacks who are either capable of performing the work in the “skilled craft” positions of the City of Milwaukee or the Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee or capable of being trained to perform said work and who have been or will be denied employment in said “skilled craft” positions because of their race.

Defendants Harry Green, Sr., Eydie V. Watts, Ralph W. Koenig, Mrs. Anthony J. Scholter, and Clifford L. Matchey are members of the Board of the City Service Commissioners of the City of Milwaukee. As members of the Board, they are responsible for the adoption and administration of the Milwaukee Civil Service Commission, § 63.18 et seq., Wis. Stats. (1971), including the examination *916 and certification of persons seeking employment with the City of Milwaukee. Defendant Robert C. Gamier is the City Personnel Director and Secretary of the Board. He is responsible for the administration of “ * * * city civil service law and rules and the personnel statutes and ordinances governing city service employment * * § 63.30, Wis. Stats. (1971). The Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee is the public body responsible for the management and control of the Milwaukee public schools pursuant to § 119.01 et seq., Wis.Stats. (1971), and is the agency which requests certification of a list of eligible persons for various “skilled craft” positions within the school system. 2

“Skilled craft” workers are examined and certified by the City Service Commission for two separate municipal employers: the City of Milwaukee itself and the Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee. (Stipulation jf 15) The City Service Commission uses the following definition of “skilled craft” in determining the job titles to be included in the skilled craft category:

“Skilled Craft Workers: Occupations in which workers perform jobs which require special manual skill and a thorough and comprehensive knowledge of the processes involved in the work which is acquired through on-the-job training and experience or through apprenticeship or other formal training programs. Includes: mechanics and repairmen, electricians, heavy equipment operators, stationary engineers, skilled machining occupations, carpenters, compositors and typesetters and kindred workers.”

A list of the skilled craft positions for the City of Milwaukee as of August 24, 1973, is annexed to this opinion as Exhibit 1(a)-1(b). A list of the skilled craft positions for the Board of School Directors as of April 8, 1974, is annexed as Exhibit 2.

For purposes of analyzing job qualifications, “skilled craft” workers employed by the City of Milwaukee or the Board of School Directors are divided into two categories — “prevailing wage” employees and “fixed wage” employees. “Prevailing wage” employees are persons working primarily in the building trades. For employment as a “prevailing wage” employee, the City Service Commission has generally required that the person have completed a formal apprenticeship in the specific trade and have a designated number of years experience as a journeyman following completion of the formal apprenticeship.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Contreras v. City of Los Angeles
656 F.2d 1267 (Ninth Circuit, 1981)
Gay v. Waiters' & Dairy Lunchmen's Union, Local No. 30
489 F. Supp. 282 (N.D. California, 1980)
Gay v. WAITERS'AND DAIRY LUNCHMEN'S UNION, LOCAL NO. 30
489 F. Supp. 282 (N.D. California, 1980)
Scott v. University of Delaware
455 F. Supp. 1102 (D. Delaware, 1978)
Croker v. Boeing Co.(Vertol Div.)
437 F. Supp. 1138 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1977)
Chrapliwy v. Uniroyal, Inc.
458 F. Supp. 252 (N.D. Indiana, 1977)
United States v. City of Chicago
416 F. Supp. 788 (N.D. Illinois, 1976)
Miller v. Krawczyk
414 F. Supp. 998 (E.D. Wisconsin, 1976)
Arthur v. Nyquist
415 F. Supp. 904 (W.D. New York, 1976)
Crockett v. Green
534 F.2d 715 (Seventh Circuit, 1976)
Jones v. Milwaukee County
68 F.R.D. 638 (E.D. Wisconsin, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
388 F. Supp. 912, 10 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 165, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crockett-v-green-wied-1975.