Eight former employees who say firings were racially motivated agree to $2.75M settlement from Lottery

  • Comments
  • Print

The Hoosier Lottery has agreed to pay $2.75 million to settle a lawsuit filed by eight black former employees who claim
racial discrimination motivated their firing four years ago.

Six of the employees had worked for the lottery since its inception in 1989, and the two others
were hired in 1997. They were all fired between January and August 2005 while Esther Schneider—Republican
Gov. Mitch Daniels’ first appointee to the position—was the lottery’s executive director.

After recording individual complaints with the
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, they filed federal suit together, alleging civil rights
violations under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Schneider stepped down in December 2006, less than two years after she took the job. On May 1
of this year, her successor, Kathryn Densborn, signed the settlement. IBJ obtained a copy through
a public records request. In it, the lottery admits no guilt.

"The Lottery denies any liability for the matters alleged in the lawsuit and contends that
the plaintiffs’ terminations of employment were lawful in all respects," it reads. "The plaintiffs
and Lottery now desire to compromise and settle the lawsuit in its entirety."

The case had been scheduled for a July jury
trial. Court records show that the lottery had planned to argue it had been overstaffed and had legitimate,
nondiscriminatory reasons for firing the eight black employees, in addition to 26 white employees. The
lottery now employs 186.

The lawsuit provides few details surrounding the firings of the black employees, beyond asserting they were based on racial

In her
EEOC complaint, former Community Affairs Manager Donna Southers, one of the lottery’s original employees, wrote that
Schneider called her into her office and terminated her "without notice, without foreknowledge and without cause."

"During my employment I had never received
so much as a warning let alone any other form of discipline," she wrote. "It should be noted
that the [Lottery] Commission has terminated an extremely large number of African Americans and since August of 2005
replaced them with Caucasians."

Local law firm Macey Swanson & Allman, which represented the former employees, will receive $841,318 as its share of the
settlement; the individual plaintiffs will each receive from $166,893 to $304,079.

Schneider, who was not a defendant, told
she had not been aware of the settlement and was "stunned" by the size of the payment.
She denied discrimination was the basis for any firing, and questioned the plaintiffs’ capacity to show proof.

"The decision for a settlement and to pay
usually overrides principles for business," said Schneider, who now works as a consultant. "It’s
not the decision I would have made had I still been the director, but it’s not my job anymore."

None of the parties to the settlement would
comment because the agreement specifically prohibits doing so. It includes a "confidentiality and
non-publicity" clause restricting disclosure.

"The parties understand and agree that the Lottery is subject to the Access to Public Records
Act … and that this agreement may qualify as a public record," the settlement reads. "The
parties nevertheless agree that they shall not directly or indirectly publicize, reveal, or in any other
manner draw attention to the settlement or this agreement.

"In the event of media inquiries concerning the settlement or this agreement," it continues,
"the parties will limit their response to a statement that the case was resolved to the mutual satisfaction
of the parties."

That’s the answer both lottery spokesman Andrew Reed and plaintiffs’ attorney Kimberly Jeselskis gave, verbatim, to IBJ‘s
questions. Daniels’ spokeswoman Jane Jankowski also declined to comment.

Calls to other parties involved in the suit were not returned.

Tumultuous tenure

Schneider was one of Daniels’ highest-profile early appointees, with a reputation as a reformer.
She had been a director of advertising for a Las Vegas casino before coming to Indiana, where she became
a GOP fund-raiser.

serving as executive director of the Indiana Senate Majority Campaign Committee in 2003, she questioned the accounting
of her predecessor, spawning a criminal investigation.

A year after becoming lottery director, Schneider found herself under scrutiny. An anonymous,
10-page letter received by Indiana’s inspector general alleged cronyism and improper expenditures. The
letter claimed she had awarded contracts to benefit friends and had assistants perform personal tasks
for her.

In August 2007,
the inspector general ruled Schneider had committed no ethics violations, other than spending $10,000 in lottery
money on a luncheon for Republican women.

By that time, the dispute over the firing of the black employees had been quietly simmering for more than two years.

In 2005, the EEOC had dismissed the individual
charges of racism against the lottery, citing insufficient information.

"Based upon its investigation, the EEOC is unable to conclude the information obtained establishes
violations of the statutes. … This does not certify that the respondent is in compliance with the statutes."

The former employees then banded together to
file the federal lawsuit. The lottery did its best to quash the case. It initially argued entitlement
to sovereign immunity as a state agency, which would have required dismissal. U.S. District Court Judge
Sarah Evans Barker rejected that line of reasoning. The lottery appealed, but last October, the U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed
Barker’s opinion.

documents suggest the case could have become politically ugly if it had gone to trial.

Among the 44 questions for potential jurors proposed by the lottery’s counsel:

• "Have you developed any opinion
of [Gov.] Mitch Daniels or his administration that would affect your view of the evidence in this case?"

• "Have you visited the Web site www.
takingdownwords.com or other Web logs ("blogs") critical of the management of the Lottery during
the administration of Mitch Daniels?"

• "What magazines, journals or newspapers do you regularly read?"

In their 26 proposed juror questions, the plaintiffs’ attorneys also inquire about political leanings:
"Have you had any bumper stickers on your car at any time during the last five years? If so, what
did they say?"

records say the lottery had planned to argue that the plaintiffs had poor performance records; checkered credit histories;
negative, insubordinate attitudes; and bad driving records.

Another settlement

This is the second discrimination lawsuit the lottery has settled stemming from Schneider’s reign.

In April 2008, it agreed to pay $225,000 to
settle a lawsuit filed by former General Counsel Janna Shisler alleging violations of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

documents say Shisler, who is quadriplegic, was hired in 1992 and consistently received excellent performance appraisals.
She supplied her own accessible desk, adaptive typing device and other equipment to facilitate her work. A longtime executive
assistant helped her with retrieving, moving and carrying documents, as well as other office tasks Shisler couldn’t perform.

Shisler’s lawsuit charged that Schneider had
a pattern of criticizing Shisler in front of other staff members. It also charged Schneider habitually
yelled at Shisler over speaker phone; and on one occasion thrust a multi-page document in her face, demanding
that she locate information, despite her inability to hold it or turn its pages.

The complaint describes escalating hostility and verbal attacks, culminating in a September 2005
incident in which Schneider ripped up a document and threw the pieces at Shisler.

That settlement was first reported by the Fort
Wayne Journal Gazette
last year. Like the settlement with black employees, it contains a confidentiality
clause that prevents parties from calling attention to the matter.

Turae Dabney, executive director of the Indianapolis Black Chamber of Commerce, said she hopes
the settlements inspire others to speak up when they think they have encountered discrimination.

With President Obama holding the nation’s highest
office, she said, it’s easy to assume racial prejudice is no longer a problem. But she said it lingers

"We still have
a far way to go, and that’s a little scary," Dabney said. "We can have a black president, and still have all
these underlying issues."

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Story Continues Below

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our updated comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.