Four women suing Google for pay discrimination just had their lawsuit upgraded to a $600m class action

Legal challenge now on behalf of more than 10,000 others

A lawsuit spearheaded by four female Google ex-employees claiming the ad giant pays men higher wages for doing the same job was granted class-action status this week.

On Thursday, Judge Andrew Cheng of the Superior Court of California in San Francisco, said [PDF] the plaintiffs – Kelly Ellis, Holly Pease, Kelli Wisuri, and Heidi Lamar – can not only proceed against Google but also can represent more than 10,800 women who may have also been unfairly paid less than their male colleagues at the internet titan.

Their complaint was filed in 2017, seeking damages from Google that could now balloon to $600m given its status. The women argued Google had violated the California Equal Pay Act, and failed to pay them their full wages after they quit or were dismissed.

“Google has discriminated and continues to discriminate against its female employees by paying female employees less than male employees with similar skills, experience, and duties; by assigning and keeping women in job ladders and levels with lower compensation ceilings and advancement opportunities than those to which men with similar skills, experience, and duties are assigned and kept; and by promoting fewer women and promoting women more slowly than it has promoted similarly-qualified men,” their paperwork stated.

“The net result of this systemic discrimination is that Google pays women less than men for comparable work.”

Ellis was hired as a frontend software engineer working on a team at Google Photos in 2010, and had at the time four years of experience working as backend developer. She was taken on as a level-three engineer, a grade associated with graduates and other early-career workers.

Within weeks of joining the company, she said Google had hired a male colleague with the same qualifications as her but as a better-paid level-four engineer. When she applied for a promotion, it was denied. It is alleged managers acknowledged her “excellent” performance reviews yet didn’t want to pay her at the same rate as her male counterparts because she hadn’t been at the company long enough.

She eventually did get promoted to level four, and claimed that by then male engineers who had similar backgrounds and experiences were already at higher levels and, thus, were paid more. Ellis quit Google in 2014, blaming its “sexist culture."

Google doesn’t just discriminate against women in technical roles, the lawsuit alleged. Kelli Wisuri was employed in sales as a level-two employee in 2012, and claimed men in sales were given level-three status. Although Wisuri was a sales representative, she said Google considered her to be on the “Sales Enablement ladder,” a class that has less pay than someone in a fully fledged sales role.

She said pretty much all workers on the sales ladder were men, and 50 per cent of people on the sales-enablement ladder were women. By 2015, she resigned, too.

A similar case was put forward by Holly Pease. As a corporate network manager, she oversaw data warehouses, software applications, and various services internally. But throughout her eleven-year career at Google, she was never promoted to a ladder that was considered technical.

Pease claimed even though she helped other employees pass technical interviews to get onto more senior technical positions, managers told her she “lacked technical ability.”

Finally: Heidi Lamar joined the lawsuit in 2018 [PDF] after earlier filing her own case against Google. She said she had discovered her male colleagues employed as preschool teachers were being paid higher starting salaries than nearly all the female ones at Google’s Children Center in Palo Alto.

A Google spokesperson told The Register: “We strongly believe in the equity of our policies and practices. For the past eight years, we have run a rigorous pay equity analysis to make sure salaries, bonuses and equity awards are fair. If we find any differences in proposed pay, including between men and women, we make upward adjustments to remove them before new compensation goes into effect.

“In 2020 alone, we made upward adjustments for 2,352 employees, across nearly every demographic category, totalling $4.4m. We also undertake rigorous analyses to ensure fairness in role leveling and performance ratings.”

It’s not the first time Google has faced such allegations. Back in February, it was ordered to cough up $3.8m in back pay for female engineers who earned less money than their male colleagues, and for discriminating against Asian women applying for jobs in technical roles.

The case is so far set to go to trial some time next year. ®

Similar topics

Broader topics

Other stories you might like

  • Experts: AI should be recognized as inventors in patent law
    Plus: Police release deepfake of murdered teen in cold case, and more

    In-brief Governments around the world should pass intellectual property laws that grant rights to AI systems, two academics at the University of New South Wales in Australia argued.

    Alexandra George, and Toby Walsh, professors of law and AI, respectively, believe failing to recognize machines as inventors could have long-lasting impacts on economies and societies. 

    "If courts and governments decide that AI-made inventions cannot be patented, the implications could be huge," they wrote in a comment article published in Nature. "Funders and businesses would be less incentivized to pursue useful research using AI inventors when a return on their investment could be limited. Society could miss out on the development of worthwhile and life-saving inventions."

    Continue reading
  • Declassified and released: More secret files on US govt's emergency doomsday powers
    Nuke incoming? Quick break out the plans for rationing, censorship, property seizures, and more

    More papers describing the orders and messages the US President can issue in the event of apocalyptic crises, such as a devastating nuclear attack, have been declassified and released for all to see.

    These government files are part of a larger collection of records that discuss the nature, reach, and use of secret Presidential Emergency Action Documents: these are executive orders, announcements, and statements to Congress that are all ready to sign and send out as soon as a doomsday scenario occurs. PEADs are supposed to give America's commander-in-chief immediate extraordinary powers to overcome extraordinary events.

    PEADs have never been declassified or revealed before. They remain hush-hush, and their exact details are not publicly known.

    Continue reading
  • Stolen university credentials up for sale by Russian crooks, FBI warns
    Forget dark-web souks, thousands of these are already being traded on public bazaars

    Russian crooks are selling network credentials and virtual private network access for a "multitude" of US universities and colleges on criminal marketplaces, according to the FBI.

    According to a warning issued on Thursday, these stolen credentials sell for thousands of dollars on both dark web and public internet forums, and could lead to subsequent cyberattacks against individual employees or the schools themselves.

    "The exposure of usernames and passwords can lead to brute force credential stuffing computer network attacks, whereby attackers attempt logins across various internet sites or exploit them for subsequent cyber attacks as criminal actors take advantage of users recycling the same credentials across multiple accounts, internet sites, and services," the Feds' alert [PDF] said.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022