$4M Forest Laboratories Gender & Pregnancy Discrimination Class Action Settlement

Who is a Class Member

Class members of the Forest Laboratories Gender & Pregnancy Discrimination Settlement include “all female sales force employees who are or were employed by Forest Laboratories, Inc., Forest Pharmaceuticals, Inc., or any of their affiliates, parents, predecessors, or successors, and assigned to a legacy-Forest position of Sales Representative, Specialty Representative, Hospital Representative, Institutional Representative and/or Regional Sales Trainer in the United States for at least one day between February 6, 2010 and April 3, 2017.”

If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other class action settlements you may be eligible for.


Settlement Amount

  • $4,000,000.00

Estimated Award

  • Varies

Class Members will receive a proportionate share of the Net Settlement Fund based on the number of weeks worked between February 6, 2010 and February 1, 2018. The exact number of workweeks have been provided on your individual settlement notice and are according to Forest’s records.

If you feel these records are incorrect or did not receive a settlement notice and believe you should be included, please contact the settlement administrator.


Proof of Purchase

  • N/A

Claim Form

  • N/A

Forest Laboratories Gender & Pregnancy Discrimination Settlement Notes

  • Megan Barrett et al. v. Forest Laboratories Inc. and Forest Pharmaceuticals Inc.
  • Case No. 1:12-cv-05224-RA
  • Pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Eleven named plaintiffs alleged that Forest Laboratories engaged in a systematic, company-wide discriminatory treatment of female employees because of their gender, because they took maternity leave, and because they became pregnant, or served as caregivers.

According to the gender and pregnancy discrimination class action lawsuit, one named plaintiff, Megan Barrett, was hired by Forest in January 2004 as a Territory Representative. She says she was wrongfully terminated on April 26, 2011. Specifically, Barrett says that prior to her return from her first maternity leave, she has received numerous awards for her sales performance. However, after returning, she faced discrimination by not advancing to a management position, her compensation was less than her male counterparts, and her performance evaluations were lowered without reason.

This alleged discrimination escalated after her third maternity leave when her manager, having already lowered her performance and annual review scores, took disciplinary action against her, saying she exhibited inappropriate behavior and attitude during sales calls. She was also placed on probation. Nevertheless, even while on probation, Barrett continued to achieve her sales goals, advance in the rankings, and receive praise from her customers. Still, Barrett was terminated in 2011, with the company saying she failed to improve in the target areas of her probation.

Barrett is not alone in her allegations. At least 10 other women alleged similar gender and pregnancy discrimination claims against Forest. The full complaint and account of each plaintiff can be read here.

Forest denies all of the allegations in the case.

Class members who wish to opt out or object to the terms of the Forest Laboratories Gender & Pregnancy Discrimination Settlement must do so by April 16, 2018. Class members who wish to receive benefits under the settlement do not need to do anything. If the settlement is granted final approval, check payments will automatically be sent.


Important Dates

  • 4/16/18: Objection or Exclusion Deadline
  • 5/2/18: Final Hearing at 9:00 am ET* (class members do not need to attend this hearing in order to receive a slice of the settlement pie).

*Settlement Class Members who wish to speak at the hearing should can contact Class Counsel at 646-402-5604 or forestsettlement@sanfordheisler.com to confirm that the date or time of the Hearing has not been changed.


Contact Information

  • Mail: Barrett v. Forest Settlement, c/o RG/2 Claims Administration LLC, P.O. Box 59479 Philadelphia, PA 19102-9479
  • Phone: 866-742-4955
  • Email: info@rg2claims.com

Class Counsel


Settlement Website

Claim $2,000 D.C. Metro Transit Employee Racial Discrimination Class Action Settlement

Who is a Class Member

Class members of the D.C. Metro Transit Employee Racial Discrimination Class Action Settlement include “all African-American persons who, since February 23, 2012, have been terminated or otherwise permanently separated from their positions, suspended with or without pay, and/or denied employment with WMATA or any third party contractor or subcontractor of WMATA as a result of the Background Screening Policy and who claim to have suffered any loss of earnings or damages as a result.”

If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other class action settlements you may be eligible for.


Settlement Amount

  • $6,500,000.00

Estimated Award

  • $2,000.00

Individuals who submit a short form claim will be eligible to receive a payment of $2,000. Individuals who submit a long form claim with supporting documentation showing proof of lost wages in excess of $2,000 could receive a larger settlement payout as outlined in the FAQs.


Proof of Purchase

  • If you submit a short form claim, you will need to confirm that
    • (1) you are African American
    • (2) you failed the Background Screening Policy, and
    • (3) after failing you were denied employment, terminated, or suspended by WMATA or a WMATA contractor
  • If you submit a long form claim, you will need to confirm that:
    • (1) you are African American
    • (2) you failed the Background Screening Policy, and
    • (3) after failing you were denied employment, terminated, or suspended by WMATA or a WMATA contractor
    • (4) You will also need to provide documentation relevant to your claim, including information about the timing and circumstances when you were denied employment, terminated, or suspended by WMATA or a WMATA contractor, the position at issue, and approximate salary, as well as any evidence of amounts earned in the interim, which will be supported by tax forms, W-2 statements, or sworn declarations.

Claim Forms

You have the option of submitting a short form claim or a long form claim. Eligible Class Members who submit short form claims will be entitled to receive a flat payment estimated to be $2,000. Eligible Class members who believe they suffered more than $2,000 in lost wages may, if they wish, submit a long form claim, providing additional documentation to support a payment greater than $2,000.

You cannot submit both a long form claim and a short form claim, or receive both a long form claim payment and a short form claim payment.


D.C. Metro Transit Employee Racial Discrimination Settlement Notes

  • Erick Little, et al. v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, et al.
  • Case No. 1:14-CV-01289-RMC
  • Pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

The class action lawsuit stems from Washington D.C. Metropolitan Transit Authority’s 2011 adoption of a criminal background screening policy which, according to the plaintiffs in the case, violates the Civil Rights Act. Specifically, the plaintiffs claim that the background screening policy “adversely and disproportionately impacted African Americans who applied for employment with WMATA or WMATA contractors or were suspended or terminated as a result of the new background screening.

WMATA denies these allegations and maintains its background screening policy was adopted for non-discriminatory reasons and does not adversely impact African-AmericansComplete details about the case and settlement are provided on the D.C. Metro Transit Employee Racial Discrimination Settlement website.

Class members who wish to opt-out or object to the terms of the D.C. Metro Transit Employee Racial Discrimination Settlement must do so by March 19, 2018. Class members who wish to participate in the settlement must submit their claim form on or before March 8, 2018.


Important Dates

  • 3/8/18: Claim Form Deadline
  • 3/19/18: Objection or Opt-Out Deadline
  • 4/23/18: Final Hearing at 9:30 am ET* (class members do not need to attend this hearing in order to receive a slice of the settlement pie).

Settlement Class Members who wish to speak at the hearing should check www.wmataclassaction.com to confirm that the date or time of the Hearing has not been changed.


Contact Information

  • Mail: Settlement Services, Inc., P.O. Box 10643, Tallahassee FL, 32302-2643

Class Counsel


Settlement Website

Former Fla. Worker Files McDonald’s Employee Discrimination Class Action Lawsuit

A former McDonald’s employee filed a proposed class action lawsuit in Florida alleging she was regularly discriminated against on the basis of her race and ethnicity.

Plaintiff J. Daza Butron brought the complaint against McDonald’s and franchise operator Nova Restaurant Inc. in October, claiming that during her 14 years of employment at a Miami-area restaurant, she was subjected to an array of derogatory terms sometimes prefaced or followed with obscenities from her managers specifically directed at her Bolivian background. She also contends she was discriminated against due to a stroke-related disability and age. The case was removed to Florida federal court earlier this week.

In the proposed McDonald’s employee discrimination class action lawsuit, Daza Butron alleges she was wrongfully fired in 2015 because of her age and disability and in retaliation for complaining about the alleged mistreatment by her managers.

“Throughout her employment with defendant, plaintiff was continually mistreated due to her national origin, age, disability, and race,” the complaint states. “Plaintiff was subjected to harassment by her district managers Nadia and Olga, the individuals of Haitian and Cuban national origin.”

According to court documents, Daza Butron states she has limited mobility in her left hand as a result of a stroke. According to the complaint, Daza Butron’s managers failed to accommodate her disability, often giving her tasks in which she was forced to use her injured hand. She also says was required to wear company provided shoes, despite the pain they caused when she wore them, the McDonald’s employee discrimination class action lawsuit alleges.

Additionally, the McDonald’s employee discrimination class action lawsuit claims the company violated the Fair Labor Standards Act by allegedly failing to pay Daza Butron for overtime hours she regularly worked.

Daza Butron is asking the court to award her compensatory damages as well as an order mandating McDonald’s reinstate her in her previous job as a food preparer. The complaint does not detail the proposed class Daza Butron is seeking to represent at this time.

This is not the first time McDonald’s or one of its franchise operators has been taken to task over alleged discriminatory practices. In 2015, ten former employees in Virginia filed a similar McDonald’s employee discrimination class action lawsuit against the fast food giant, claiming they were “subjected to rampant racial and sexual harassment, committed by the restaurants’ highest-ranking supervisors.” The workers allege their complaints about the alleged discrimination and wrongful terminations to McDonald’s corporate offices were ignored.

More recently in May 2017, a former McDonald’s employee sued the company and a franchise owner in Michigan after allegedly being sexually harassed and subjected to discrimination in the workplace on multiple occasions by her managers because she identifies as transgender. The plaintiff in this case claims she reported the incidences to the franchise owner and was subsequently fired.

Daza Butron is represented by Anthony Maximillien Georges-Pierre of Remer & Georges-Pierre PLLC.

The McDonald’s Employee Discrimination Class Action Lawsuit is Daza Butron v. Nova Restaurant Inc. et al., Case No. 1:17-cv-24216, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.