Jahan Sagafi

In April, Sagafi persuaded a federal judge to reverse himself and certify a class of job applicants accusing one of the big four accounting firms, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLC, of age discrimination.

"We had almost won our first class certification motion last July," Sagafi said. "The judge said then there was evidence of systematic age discrimination, but he found problems. So we fixed 'em."

Plaintiff Steve Rabin, 53, a certified public accountant, was a qualified applicant who had worked at small accounting firms but contended that without work at a big firm his career would be limited. The complaint Sagafi drafted cited PricewaterhouseCooper's own study on recruiting millennials -- those between 21 and 36 -- which said it aimed to have most of its workers in that age range.

"The underrepresentation of workers over age 40 at PcC is stark," the complaint contends. Rabin v. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLC, 16-CV2276 (N.D. Cal., filed April 27, 2016).

U.S. District Judge Jon S. Tigar of San Francisco told Sagafi last year he had a problem with a class that included both qualified and unqualified applicants along with those discouraged from seeking work due to the company's policies. "So we dropped those members from the suit," Sagafi said.

Then he got a boost from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which last September established a lower standard for conditional certification in such cases. "It lowered the bar by requiring only limited evidence," Sagafi said. Campbell v. City of Los Angeles, 903 F.3rd 1090 (9th Cir., published Sept. 13, 2018).

"Age discrimination is notoriously hard to prove," Sagafi said. "It's super hard to do, but statistics can help show patterns, and after we looked into it at PricewaterhouseCoopers, we could see it was happening across the board."

Sagafi filed a renewed motion for certification. This time, Tigar granted it.

"We are now working on a notice plan to 10,000 to 20,000 potential class members," Sagafi said.

Last year Sagafi's class action against Uber Technologies Inc., alleging discrimination against women and people of color who worked there as software engineers, resulted in a $10 million settlement. Along with the money were provisions for significant programmatic relief, in which Uber agreed that future hiring will be based on clear standards and promotions on objective merit.

Uber also agreed to monitor compensation for adverse impact based on race and gender. Del Toro Lopez v. Uber Technologies Inc., 17-CV6255 (N.D. Cal., filed Oct. 27, 2017).

-- John Roemer