Lockheed Martin Discrimination

Home

This website provides information and updates relating to a sex discrimination class action filed against Lockheed Martin in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The lawsuit alleges that women have been denied professional advancement opportunities and equal pay in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination. According to the complaint, Lockheed Martin discriminates against its salaried female employees by advancing male employees more quickly than equally or more qualified female employees through middle management and into upper management level positions, and discriminates in compensation to these female employees, including with respect to pay grade, annual and promotional increases, merit pay increases and bonuses.

The suit seeks an order that Lockheed Martin establish fair employment practices which do not discriminate against women in promotion, hiring and compensation, an injunction that would bar the corporation from any acts of discrimination in the future, and back and front pay differentials and other monetary damages. To find out more about the Factual Allegations and Relief Sought, please review the Third Amended Complaint which can be found here.

Most Recent Key Developments

January 31, 2012: Third Circuit Court of Appeals denies plaintiffs' appeal of the denial of class certification. - On December 14, 2011, the District Court judge presiding over Bell v. Lockheed Martin, denied class certification based on the Supreme Court's decision in Dukes, et al v. Wal-Mart, Inc., 131 S.Ct. 2541 (2011). For more information on how to proceed, Click Here.

Judge Robert B.Kugler grants plaintiffs' motion to amend the complaint to add three additional women - Gwendolyn Goffney, Dianne Sosa, and Andrea de la Torre - as class representatives. To view Judge Kugler's order, please click here and to view the Third Amended Complaint, please click here .

The Court denies Lockheed Martin's Motion regarding the temporal scope of discovery and orders it to produce data for its employees two years prior to the Class Period. Click here for the order.

Lead Plaintiffs file a Second Amended Class Action Complaint that, among other things, adds the individual claims of two new plaintiffs, Linda Abt and Maxine Walker. Click here to view a copy of Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint.

After extensive briefing and argument the Court ordered nationwide discovery including data concerning the full demographic identity of the relevant workforce. The Court also granted plaintiff Carol Bell's motion to amend the complaint to add two additional named plaintiffs, Linda Abt and Maxine Walker. To review copies of the Court's Orders, please click here and here.