Anne B. Shaver

Shaver, a partner in Lieff Cabraser’s employment practice group, focuses on gender class actions that challenge the business practices and work cultures at some of the largest and most powerful companies in the world. Targets have included Google LLC, Sandia LLC, Microsoft Inc., Goldman Sachs & Co. and KPMG US LLP.

“Pay equity suits targeting smaller companies are on the increase as states amend their statutes to make them easier to bring,” she said.

One of Shaver’s major cases has been in litigation since 2010. It accuses global investment bank Goldman Sachs of discriminating against female associates and vice presidents in pay, promotions and evaluations. “This has been an extremely unusual and complicated scenario,” Shaver said. Her team filed for class certification in 2014 and the matter has been moving slowly since.

One time-consuming problem was that judges have retired or been out sick while the litigation was in progress; another was that because the case was originally assigned to a magistrate judge, the parties have had to argue each step twice — to that judge and to the district court in the Southern District of New York.

“Also, we’ve been to the 2nd Circuit twice,” Shaver said. The first time the appellate court granted Goldman Sachs’ motion to compel arbitration regarding one of the named plaintiffs, a managing director. Four named plaintiffs remain; the court rejected a later Goldman Sachs request for interlocutory review. U.S. District Judge Analisa N. Torres of New York granted class certification on a basis that allows Shaver’s clients to seek monetary damages. Goldman Sachs has asked the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to review that decision. Meanwhile, a parallel to certify a class seeking injunctive relief remains before the trial court. Chen-Oster v. Goldman Sachs & Co., 10-cv-6950 (S.D. N.Y., filed Sept. 15, 2010). “There are about 2,000 in the certified class,” Shaver said. “Potentially, that’s a lot of money.”

A much newer case, filed late last year, contends that Google Inc. has paid women less than men who performed substantially equal or similar work in engineering, program management, sales and early childhood education. The case is among the first to be brought under California’s recently amended Equal Pay Act.

It is unusual because Google disclosed in litigation with the Department of Labor that government auditors had found systematic discrimination. Ellis v. Google Inc., CGC-17-561299 (San Francisco Super. Ct., filed Sept. 14, 2017).

“I like the most having the opportunity to bring cases that move the law in a progressive direction for employees,” Shaver said.

“Due to an increasingly conservative Supreme Court it’s difficult, but that doesn’t mean the fight is over.”

— John Roemer