Search By:
Products
Injury
Topic
Company
Industry
3M might unlawfully discriminate against employees over 45.
Investigation Source (Case #62-C4-04-012239)
- Nationwide
Investigation Scope
Category Information
Investigation Topic
- Age Discrimination
Products or Services
- Your Occupation
- Hourly Employees
Injury Types
- Monetary Loss
- Discrimination
Investigation Details
Investigation and pending class action lawsuits against 3M on behalf of current and former 3M employees alleging 3M violated the Minnesota Human Rights Act by policies, practices and patterns of decisions related to performance appraisals, training, promotion, pay and termination that discriminate against employees over the age of 45.
Plaintiffs anticipate that the class will include in excess of 4,700 current and former salaried exempt employees. In a related federal class action former 3M employees have filed charges alleging that 3M violated the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) by policies, practices and patterns of decisions related to performance appraisals, training, promotion, pay and termination that discriminate against employees over the age of 40. The charges further allege that 3M's release is illegal and invalid, that it misleads employees into thinking that they cannot file administrative charges with the EEOC, and that 3M wrongly used the release to shield itself from liability for known discriminatory practices.
The charges are brought on behalf of the individual charging party and other persons similarly situated.
Plaintiffs anticipate that the class will include in excess of 4,700 current and former salaried exempt employees. In a related federal class action former 3M employees have filed charges alleging that 3M violated the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) by policies, practices and patterns of decisions related to performance appraisals, training, promotion, pay and termination that discriminate against employees over the age of 40. The charges further allege that 3M's release is illegal and invalid, that it misleads employees into thinking that they cannot file administrative charges with the EEOC, and that 3M wrongly used the release to shield itself from liability for known discriminatory practices.
The charges are brought on behalf of the individual charging party and other persons similarly situated.
Defendant Details
| Name (Stock Symbol) | Brief Description |
|---|---|
| 3M Company (MMM) | 3M Company (3M) is a Fortune 500 company. It provides products and services to the industrial, transportation, health care, safety, security services industries as well as directly to consumers. |