KYW morning anchor sues saying Audacy ‘systematically’ paid her less than male coworkers

[Larry]

From Phila Business Journal:

Longtime KYW Newsradio morning anchor Carol MacKenzie is suing parent company Audacy for gender and age discrimination, claiming she has been “systematically” paid less than her male coworkers and those younger than her.

The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia on behalf of MacKenzie by Wayne-based lawyer Scott Pollins of Pollins Law, alleges that in the first several years of her employment, MacKenzie was paid roughly $20,000 to $30,000 less than “similarly situated” male coworkers.

https://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/news/2023/11/15/kyw-news-anchor-sues-audacy-for-discrimination.html

 

[Larry]

KYW Newsradio anchor files gender and age discrimination lawsuit against the station

Carol MacKenzie, 58, began working at the Audacy-owned station in 2003, and was paid $20,000 to $30,000 less than men employed in similar roles, the lawsuit alleges.

www.inquirer.com

 

[TheBigA]

So she willingly worked there for 20 years, knowing that she was getting paid less. Only brought it up once, and it was when another woman was hired, who got paid more. Never spoke to the union about this until last year? Sounds like she's looking to retire with a payout.

 

[davideduardo]

So she willingly worked there for 20 years, knowing that she was getting paid less. Only brought it up once, and it was when another woman was hired, who got paid more. Never spoke to the union about this until last year? Sounds like she's looking to retire with a payout.

Unfortunately, what often happens in these cases is that the employer looks at the legal costs and offers a cash "go away" settlement along with very stringent "no comments to the press" requirements.

 

[AbrahamJSimpson]

So she willingly worked there for 20 years, knowing that she was getting paid less. Only brought it up once, and it was when another woman was hired, who got paid more. Never spoke to the union about this until last year? Sounds like she's looking to retire with a payout.

Or, maybe not everyone has the feeling it’s feasible to make formal complaints at other times for any of a plethora of reasons. It’s not as though options are unlimited.

The problem here, if her allegations have substantiation, rests with the station, not her course of action previously.

Not buying into the victim shaming or flippant dismissal as someone just wanting a payout.

 

[Larry]

So she willingly worked there for 20 years, knowing that she was getting paid less. Only brought it up once, and it was when another woman was hired, who got paid more. Never spoke to the union about this until last year? Sounds like she's looking to retire with a payout.

It also appears she may have an sex discrimination case going back at least 10 years it wasn’t until the past few years where newer, younger people (lawsuit mentions Denise Nakano) were hired at above her salary which adds age discrimination to her claim.

 

[TheBigA]

Or, maybe not everyone has the feeling it’s feasible to make formal complaints at other times for any of a plethora of reasons.

I've been a member of two unions, one of which was AFTRA. The minute you become a member, they explain your rights as an employee, and they tell you that they are there to support you in any labor dispute. The pathway was there in front of her. What happened here is that a lawyer contacted her with a proposal. That's what I see. Some lawyer saw a quick commission.

The problem here, if her allegations have substantiation, rests with the station, not her course of action previously.

She's charging age discrimination, but she wasn't 58 when she was hired. She's charging gender discrimination, but other women were paid more. So she really wasn't discriminated against because there isn't a pattern of these kinds of things by the same employer.

The problem with long term employees is they get hired at one salary, and the base pay changes as time goes on. That's why it's advisable to leave a company after a few years for better pay if you're not in a promotable position. If you stay, all you'll get is the scheduled contract increase from that base pay. She stayed in the same job too long. Meanwhile, other people came in at higher base rates. The union negotiated new contracts every few years. Didn't they notice the new base pay was higher than it was in 2003? I'm sure they did, and so this should have been adjusted then.

 

[speer360]

KYW Morning Anchor Carol MacKenzie Sues Audacy For Age/Gender Discrimination - RadioInsight

Audacy News 1060 KYW/103.9 WPHI Philadelphia morning co-anchor Carol MacKenzie is suing the company for gender and age discrimination seeking unspecified back pay, damages, interest, attorney fees, and injunctive and declaratory relief claiming the company violated the Equal Pay Act and the...

radioinsight.com

 

[AbrahamJSimpson]

I've been a member of two unions, one of which was AFTRA. The minute you become a member, they explain your rights as an employee, and they tell you that they are there to support you in any labor dispute. The pathway was there in front of her. What happened here is that a lawyer contacted her with a proposal. That's what I see. Some lawyer saw a quick commission.


She's charging age discrimination, but she wasn't 58 when she was hired. She's charging gender discrimination, but other women were paid more. So she really wasn't discriminated against because there isn't a pattern of these kinds of things by the same employer.

The problem with long term employees is they get hired at one salary, and the base pay changes as time goes on. That's why it's advisable to leave a company after a few years for better pay if you're not in a promotable position. If you stay, all you'll get is the scheduled contract increase from that base pay. She stayed in the same job too long. Meanwhile, other people came in at higher base rates. The union negotiated new contracts every few years. Didn't they notice the new base pay was higher than it was in 2003? I'm sure they did, and so this should have been adjusted then.

It’s remarkable that you’ve judged the case in the absence of discovery and legal proceedings. A news article summary is not an entire case nor all the evidence. It may well be that there isn’t sufficient cause. So be it. But I’m not going to assume someone didn’t go through and/or doesn’t have reason to pursue at this time this action and ascribe less-than-ethical motives. Some people do that. Some don’t. People have different circumstances none of us know in detail.

 

[TheBigA]

It’s remarkable that you’ve judged the case in the absence of discovery and legal proceedings.

I'm not a judge, just making observations, which we all are entitled to do.

Employees today sign "at will" agreements. Those agreements state clearly what the rules are. I assume she signed such an agreement, and the union was aware the agreement was in place. My question is why didn't the union take a stronger role in this. But you might be correct, and the reporting simply didn't cover that aspect. Typically the reporting is based on the court filings, not rumor or gossip. That's why I have little reason to question the reporting. It covers the plaintiff's points in the complaint, so she gets the benefit of that.

 

[Larry]

Employees today sign "at will" agreements. Those agreements state clearly what the rules are. I assume she signed such an agreement, and the union was aware the agreement was in place

I believe she would not be considered at “at will” employee as she has a contract with a station. Employees with employment contracts are not considered at will. The contract would govern things like termination.

 

[TheBigA]

I believe she would not be considered at “at will” employee as she has a contract with a station. Employees with employment contracts are not considered at will. The contract would govern things like termination.

A lot of aspects in at-will agreements are included in personal services contracts. The purpose is to prevent these kinds of lawsuits. If she has a direct employment contract, then her salary was negotiable, and not part of a larger agreement. According to the article, she's also a union member, and they have a contract with the station.

 

[kenneykop]

I hear the teletype is also filing an age discrimination suit!!!

 

[radiofan2023]

I hear the teletype is also filing an age discrimination suit!!!

You wouldn’t be laughing if the person suing was your mother or your sister.

 

[seattlesarchiebunker]

You wouldn’t be laughing if the person suing was your mother or your sister.

I would hope my mother or sister would be intelligent enough to realize a pay discrepancy based on sex (or hire date), offer the employer an opportunity to correct it, and if things were still below the board, sue for damages.

Places I’ve worked where pay discrimination was based on sex usually have what are referred to as “pigs” in management roles. Pay discrimination is usually just scratching the surface in those situations

 

[AbrahamJSimpson]

I would hope my mother or sister would be intelligent enough to realize a pay discrepancy based on sex (or hire date), offer the employer an opportunity to correct it, and if things were still below the board, sue for damages.

If only life were anywhere near that neat and easy.

 

[radiofan2023]

I would hope my mother or sister would be intelligent enough to realize a pay discrepancy based on sex (or hire date), offer the employer an opportunity to correct it, and if things were still below the board, sue for damages.

Places I’ve worked where pay discrimination was based on sex usually have what are referred to as “pigs” in management roles. Pay discrimination is usually just scratching the surface in those situations

I doubt it since most people don’t talk about their pay with each other, even though they’re allowed to under the National Labor Relations Act:

Your Right to Discuss Wages | National Labor Relations Board

Under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or the Act), employees have the right to communicate with other employees at their workplace about their wages. Wages are a vital term and condition of employment, and discussions of wages are often preliminary to organizing or other actions for...

www.nlrb.gov