Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. and Johnnie Cochran File Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint Against Microsoft.

Business/Legal Editors

SEATTLE--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 3, 2001

Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C., ("Cohen Milstein"), known for taking on some of the nation's most powerful corporations, and Johnnie Cochran of Cochran, Cherry, Givens, and Smith, P.C. have filed a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle against Microsoft Corporation alleging a pattern and practice of race and sex discrimination against African Americans and female salaried employees in violation of the federal civil rights laws.

Joining as attorneys for plaintiffs is Carl Lopez of Lopez & Fantel, P.S. The court has appointed Cohen Milstein as lead counsel in the consolidated action.

The Consolidated Amended Complaint seeks to certify a class consisting of all current and former African American salaried employees in the United States who have been employed by Microsoft at any time from October 4, 1997 through the commencement of trial and all current and former female salaried employees in the United States who have been employed by Microsoft at any time from February 23, 1999 through the commencement of trial. The Consolidated Amended Complaint was filed after Judge Marsha Pechman ordered consolidation of all similar cases filed in the Western District of Washington.

The Consolidated Amended Complaint alleges that employment policies and practices of Microsoft allow the Company's managers to exercise unbridled discretion, which have had the effect and caused the denial of promotional opportunities and equal compensation to qualified African American and female salaried employees.

The four named plaintiffs in the case have alleged they have been affected by Microsoft's policy of allowing managers to exercise excessive subjectivity in deciding on compensation, evaluations, promotions, and job selections, such that the decisions were infected with racial and/or gender bias. Three of the named plaintiffs are current or former Microsoft employees in the Seattle area, one is a former employee who worked in Texas.

In the consolidated amended complaint, plaintiffs describe the following experiences:

Landruff E. Trent II, an African American male and another named

plaintiff, began working for Microsoft as a Group Program Manager

in June 1998. Four months later, the Group Manager, overseeing

Data Center Operations, announced his departure and recommended

Trent for the position. Trent was asked to perform the Group

Manager duties, but not offered the position's salary or job

title.

Trent received two excellent performance reviews while acting as

Group Manager. Yet, in October 1999, his supervisor removed him

from the position and promoted in his place a white individual who

Trent had trained. Trent was demoted to manage a team known for

underperforming and Trent had to report to the man who he

previously had supervised. Trent turned that team around and

received a good performance review in the summer of 2000. Shortly

thereafter, Trent went on vacation. When he returned, he learned

of an incident that had occurred while he was away. Trent's white

manager made him the scape goat. Trent was told to "move on."

Since that time, Trent has applied for and been denied numerous

positions at Microsoft.

Donaldson began her career at Microsoft in 1992 as a "contract"

employee. She became a full-time employee the following year and

consistently received excellent review ratings. In 1996, Donaldson

left Microsoft to pursue another opportunity. She returned to the

Microsoft in 1998 as a Technical Writer. At first she got along

well with the white male Project Lead in her group. In fact, he

frequently sought her advice on management and morale issues.

However, in a discussion prior to the review process, he told her

that there were several areas where she did not have certain "core

competencies." When she asked him for examples, he could not

provide any, became defensive and ended the meeting.

Soon after, Donaldson was offered the position of Program Manager

in the MSN Operations Group. Because she left in the middle of a

review period, her former Project Lead conducted her performance

review. He gave her an undeserved rating which reflected his

racial and gender biases as well as his dissatisfaction that other

managers felt her performance was better than he did.

When Donaldson's began in the position of Program Manager,

Microsoft changed its grade level system. Donaldson was denied the

standard level for her position because of her former supervisor's

biased evaluation. Within three months, Microsoft hired the

contractor as a full-time employee and made him her supervisor

although he was unqualified for the position and the position was

not posted prior to Microsoft's decision to interview him.

Donaldson's office was moved to another building which isolated

her from her team.

Donaldson asked permission to interview internally at Microsoft,

but was denied the amount of time normally given to employees. In

February 2000, another group was interested in hiring Donaldson,

but her supervisor gave her a performance review score which

prevented the group from hiring her. In May 2000, Donaldson

resigned because of the discrimination she experienced.

Douglas had an 11 year career at Microsoft which ended in April

2000 when he resigned from Microsoft because of its practices of

denying him promotions and equitable compensation. In 1995,

Douglas was a Program Manager, overseeing Microsoft's global

e-mail system migration. The following year, when the project was

nearly complete, Douglas' white supervisors brought in a white

Project Manager to take over the project and as a result, receive

credit for its success. Douglas had been promised a promotion at

the end of the project which he never received.

After a corporate re-organization, Douglas became a Program

Manager for Microsoft's Office Group. His white manager assigned 

Douglas to a product that would ship in April 1997. After it

successfully shipped, Douglas was told that he would get an

excellent performance review score. However, instead, Douglas

received an average score and was told that his ability to write

code was insufficient. This was the first time such a requirement

had ever been mentioned for the position. Douglas' supervisor

refused to let him take training courses and instead asked him to

leave the group. Douglas expressed interest in another position in

the group, but his manager offered it to a white person who was

less qualified for the position.

Douglas transferred positions. He stayed in the next group for 15

months. His manager in that group was directed to take courses on

improving communications and interpersonal relations after half of

the team resigned because of the treatment they received. In

February 1999, Douglas transferred positions and became

responsible for MSN's intranet site, used by nearly 4,000 people.

In November 1999, Douglas' supervisor announced that he was

leaving and agreed to conduct Douglas' review before his

departure. Douglas received an excellent review and a promotion

request. Yet, the new manager rejected his review score and

promotion in February 2000. Douglas appealed his review and was

awarded a salary and grade level increase. Soon after, he learned

that Microsoft had offered a white male contractor a full-time

position as a Program Manager. This individual was making $15,000

more per year than Douglas and received a $10,000 signing bonus 

and higher grade level. This white employee had no prior

management experience, in contrast to Douglas' five years.

In addition to the Seattle case, there is another discrimination case pending against Microsoft in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, filed by Willie E. Gary of Gary, Williams, Parenti, Finney, Lewis, McManus, Watson, & Sperando. That case only involves claims for African American employees at Microsoft. It had been assigned to Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson, who recently recused himself from hearing the case. Microsoft's motion to transfer that case to Seattle is pending.