San Diego

Women scientists who lost their jobs at the US Geological Survey (USGS) office in Denver, Colorado, during a major layoff have filed a discrimination complaint with federal authorities. They allege that they were targeted for discharge because of their age and gender.

This is the latest in a series of legal fights that have continued since the 1995 ‘reduction in force’, when 525 of the 1,850 scientists in the USGS geology division, which is spread over different sites, were laid off, retired or diverted to other jobs. Since then, more scientists have left.

The complaint was filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in January by two former scientists on behalf of up to 20 women.

The two women — Constance Throckmorton and Kathryn Nichols — claim that female geologists older than 40 were “affected at a rate nearly twice that of male counterparts”. Of the 44 women scientists in the Denver division, 45 per cent were laid off, while only 23 per cent of the 215 men lost their jobs, they say.

Nichols, who had worked at the USGS for nineteen years, was a year from retirement eligibility when she was laid off. She says that her history of challenging “an old-boy network” had made her unpopular with top USGS officials who “didn't want anyone challenging old [scientific] conclusions”. Nichols, who received her doctorate at Stanford University, says: “I was an intellectual threat.”

In support of their belief that uneconomical overstaffing was not the genuine reason for the redundancies, the women cite an e-mail which USGS Chief Geologist, Patrick Leahy sent to all geological staff in early January, in which he says that the “top concern” of the USGS is to recruit new scientific staff, which the agency is doing by hiring a “modest” number of postdoctoral fellows.

Thomas Fouch, the regional geologist in Denver, says that despite the sharp blow to morale caused by the layoffs, the USGS is “in good [scientific] shape”, in contrast to allegations by some dissatisfied staff. The number of scientific publications published by the USGS has not decreased since 1995, he says.

The move was made necessary by budget cuts, he claims. He adds that the workforce reductions have allowed the USGS to implement modern employment standards because future staff will be hired on short-term contracts. The laid-off USGS scientists thought they had “a job for life [as] an entitlement”, says Fouch.

USGS director Charles Groat and other top officials at the agency's headquarters in Virginia declined to comment on the discrimination claim. The EEOC will review the allegation, conduct a hearing and issue a ruling. The women can take their complaint to the federal court if they are dissatisfied with the ruling.

Meanwhile, one long-time geologist in Denver privately describes the current situation as follows: “The mood is very pessimistic; morale is low.”