IBJNews

Professor sues IU medical school for gender discrimination

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

A physiology professor at the Indiana University School of Medicine filed a scathing gender-discrimination lawsuit this month, accusing the school of paying her significantly less than male counterparts with less experience.

Subah Packer, 57, wants IU to compensate her for loss of past and future income, and pay her attorneys’ fees. She has worked for IU since 1986 and has been a tenured associate professor of clinical and integrative physiology since 2001.

Since then, Packer alleges, her department has hired five less-experienced professors, all male, and paid four of them substantially more than Packer. Her complaint lists her salary as $74,600, compared to starting salaries of roughly $92,000 for three of the newer hires, as well as $82,000 and $72,000 for the other two.

Packer also alleges that her salary is below the median of the physiology department, which includes 19 tenured or tenure-track professors, even though her teaching load was greater and she had less laboratory space for conducting research. Many of the professors in the department are paid more than $100,000 annually.

“The environment for women faculty members at [the university] has not been good,” Packer’s lawsuit states, adding that IU’s “programs to increase retention and promotion of women are a facade.”

Packer first complained about her salary formally in 2003 by filing a grievance. She withdrew that complaint in hopes that a new chairman of the physiology department would improve her circumstances.

But things only got worse, Packer alleges. In 2004, the new department chairman, Michael Sturek, allegedly “took away” Packer’s lab space and her office space while at the same time assigning her even more teaching duties. Packer said her research output dropped off as a result.

In 2006 and 2007, Sturek gave Packer negative reviews, specifically citing her lower productivity in research. His reviews triggered a formal “review & enhancement” proceeding by the university. Packer survived that process but says she continues to face "retaliation" from Sturek and other IU officials.

In 2009, Packer won the national educator of the year award from the American Physiological Society. During that year, IU had frozen faculty salaries. But even after IU President Michael McRobbie approved salary increases for all IU faculty in 2010, Sturek still did not give one to Packer, her lawsuit alleges. She says her pay has been frozen since 2005.

“Dr. Packer expressed concern for the unlawful discrimination to which she was being subjected and, in response, [IU] intensified the mistreatment of her,” wrote Packer’s attorney John Ittenbach in the lawsuit. “Dr. Packer was badgered, ignored, isolated, and humiliated.”

Packer eventually filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which declined to investigate. She filed her lawsuit Jan. 4 in U.S. District Court in Indianapolis.

"They’ve put me in a position where I’ve had no choice," Packer said in an interview. "I want to see a constructive outcome from IU from this. I want to see IU be a better place because I’m fighting for this."

Mary Hardin, a spokeswoman for the IU medical school, said the school would not comment on the lawsuit.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Difference in Pay
    Also John, another important point is that getting less pay because of gender discrimination is different than just getting less pay.
  • Good for Her
    The point John is that she's getting paid less than equally qualified or less qualified people in the department. Is it because she's doing less good quality research? Hard to tell if it is true her laboratory was taken away and she was given a lot more teaching in her schedule. I doubt this professor has any ulterior motives for pushing this suit. So you have to wonder where the truth lies.
  • Below the Median
    So let me get this straight...she some people make more...but some people still make LESS than her. So she makes MORE than others in the department. What about those people. It is called LIFE. There will always be people that make more than you. And you will always make more than someone else. Out of the 19 peoplein the department...it sounds like she was making less than the median but it didn't say she was paid the least.
    • Settle This One
      Suggestion: Settle this mess out of court. This suit has disaster written all over it.

    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. liek the rest of America

    2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

    3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

    4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

    5. whoa!

    ADVERTISEMENT