IBJNews

Former Eiteljorg director suing museum for overtime pay

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A former merchandising director of the Eiteljorg Museum of American Indians and Western Art is suing the downtown Indianapolis museum for allegedly failing to pay her for working more than 1,000 hours of overtime.

Judy McElfresh, who lives in Plainfield, filed the lawsuit in Marion Superior Court, claiming the Eiteljorg violated the Fair Labor Standards and Equal Pay acts.

Besides not being compensated for overtime, McElfresh charges in her complaint that the museum paid her less than male employees earned for similar work.

“Judy contends that she was not paid commensurate as other males in director positions,” said her attorney, Mark Waterfill, with the Indianapolis office of Cleveland-based law firm Benesch.

McElfresh is seeking at least $75,000 in damages from a jury.

She claims in her suit that the museum should not have considered her an overtime-exempt employee because she primarily helped customers and stocked shelves at the gift shop.

Instead of being paid for overtime, the Eiteljorg compensated her with “comp” and “flex” time, McElfresh alleges.

The 1,025 hours of overtime McElfresh claims she worked without being paid equates to more than two dozen 40-hour work weeks.

McElfresh is seeking compensation of “time and-one-half” her regular hourly rate. She worked as director of merchandising for four years before being terminated in May of this year.

A spokesman for the museum said it doesn’t comment on personnel issues.

Also named as defendants in the suit are John Vanausdall, president and CEO of the museum; Martha Hill, vice president of programming and visitor experience; and Susan Lewis, vice president of administration and chief financial officer.

McElfresh filed her suit Aug. 15.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. John, unfortunately CTRWD wants to put the tank(s) right next to a nature preserve and at the southern entrance to Carmel off of Keystone. Not exactly the kind of message you want to send to residents and visitors (come see our tanks as you enter our city and we build stuff in nature preserves...

  2. 85 feet for an ambitious project? I could shoot ej*culate farther than that.

  3. I tried, can't take it anymore. Untill Katz is replaced I can't listen anymore.

  4. Perhaps, but they've had a very active program to reduce rainwater/sump pump inflows for a number of years. But you are correct that controlling these peak flows will require spending more money - surge tanks, lines or removing storm water inflow at the source.

  5. All sewage goes to the Carmel treatment plant on the White River at 96th St. Rainfall should not affect sewage flows, but somehow it does - and the increased rate is more than the plant can handle a few times each year. One big source is typically homeowners who have their sump pumps connect into the sanitary sewer line rather than to the storm sewer line or yard. So we (Carmel and Clay Twp) need someway to hold the excess flow for a few days until the plant can process this material. Carmel wants the surge tank located at the treatment plant but than means an expensive underground line has to be installed through residential areas while CTRWD wants the surge tank located further 'upstream' from the treatment plant which costs less. Either solution works from an environmental control perspective. The less expensive solution means some people would likely have an unsightly tank near them. Carmel wants the more expensive solution - surprise!

ADVERTISEMENT