IN RE: Ryder Truck Lines, Inc., Employement Practices Litigation

Case MDL No. 220 Document 2 Filed 05/01/15 Page 1 of 6
. . RRS SP
Coe a REALE ron
BEFORE THE JUDICIAL PANEL FILED
MULTIDISTRIOY LITIGATION DEC-5 1973
IN RE RYDER TRUCK LINES, INC. ) ALEEMPLOYMENT PRACTICES LITIGATION )
OPINION AND ORDER :
BEFORE ALFRED P. MURRAH x, CHATRMAN, AND JOHN MINOR WISDOM,
EDWARD WEINFELD, EDWIN A. ROBSON, WILLIAM H. BECKER,
JOSEPH S. LORD, III, AND STANLEY A. WEIGEL, JUDGES OF
THE PANEL
PER CURIAM |
This litigation consists of four actions in three
districts: two in the Middle District of Tennessee, one in
the Western District of Tennessee and one in the Northern
District of Georgia. Ryder Truck Lines, Inc. (Ryder) is
a defendant in all four actions. The International Brother-
hood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers and
the appropriate Teamsters' local union are defendants in each
action except the Cook action inMiddle Tennessee. The
Southern Regional Conference of Teamsters is a defendant
in the Georgia and Western Tennessee actions.
Plaintiffs in each action allege that prior to
1972, Ryder hired whites only for the position of line driver
while blacks were relegated to the lower paying position
of city driver. Although Ryder terminated this policy in 1972,
plaintiffs allege that blacks seeking transfers from city driver
—
* Judge Murrah did not participate in the consideration
or decision of this matter.

| Case MDL No. 220 Document 2 Filed 05/01/15 Page 2 of 6
So -2-
to line driver positions were required to relinquish all senior-
ity accrued in their city driver positions. In addition, plain-
tiffs allege discrimination generally in Ryder's hiring and pro-
motion policies. Plaintiffs allege that these acts on the part
of Ryder, as well as the unions, constitute violations of Title vir
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C, §1981.
Each of the actions in the litigation, with the exception
of Cook, was brought as a class action on behalf of substantially
similar classes. The Georgia court has ruled that the action in
that district is properly maintainable as a class action under g
Rule 23(b) (2), Fed. R. Civ. P., on behalf of all past and present
black employees of Ryder within the area of the Southern Conference
of Teamsters, all black persons who unsuccessfully applied for
employment with Ryder since July 2, 1965, and all black persons
who will apply for work or be employed by Ryder in that area in
the future. No class determinations have yet been made in the
~~ two other purported class actions.
This matter is before the Panel on Ryder's motion to
transfer all actions to the Northern District of Georgia for
coordinated or consolidated pretrial Proceedings pursuant to
28 U.S.C. §1407. Only the plaintiff in Cook opposes transfer.
We find that these actions raise common questions of
fact and that their transfer to the Northern District of Georgia
under Section 1407 will best serve the convenience of the parties
and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of the
pve
. litigation.
Y/ Bhe.parties wavedior Tih, tp gral ggumeny and,the question of transfer of these actions under Section 1407
was submitted for decision on the briefs.

Case MDL No. 220 Document 2 Filed 05/01/15 Page 3 of 6
. _ 3.
Plaintiff Cook concedes that his action and the other
three share common factual questions on the issue of Ryder's
racial policies at its Nashville terminal, but nonetheless main-
tains that this is insufficient commonality to justify transfer.
He points out that his action, unlike the others, is not brought
as a class action. And he asserts that he is an indigent with
appointed counsel and cannot afford to support the expense of
his attorney traveling back and forth to Atlanta for pretrial
proceedings.
This litigation is similar to two previous employment
practiceslitigations considered by the Panel. See In re Roadway
Express Employment Practices Litigation, 384 F. Supp. 612
(J.P.M.L,.. 1974) (transfer ordered) and In re Trucking Industry
Employment Practices Litigation, 384 F. Supp. 614 (J.P.M.L. 1974)
(transfer denied).
In Roadway Express, supra, the Panel transferred four
class actions pending in two districts within Texas against
the same major defendants, each action involving alleged viola-
tions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Plaintiffs
in those actions claimed that the defendants had favored white
employees for the higher paying position of long haul driver
while assigning non-whites the lower paying position of city driver.
In Trucking Industry, supra, the Panel refused to trans-
fer three actions wherein plaintiffs alleged discrimination like
that alleged in Roadway Express, although it recognized the
existence of limited common guestions of fact. The denial

Case MDL No. 220 Document 2 Filed 05/01/15 Page 4 of 6
: - 4 -
of transfer was based on several factors: the existence of only
a handful of common defendants among the three actions, while the
total number of defendants in the actions collectively was close to
400; the fact that the two private actions, unlike the Government
action, involved primarily specific local acts of alleged discrimi-
nation; and the Panel's conclusion that transfer of the private
actions might have a deleterious effect on consent procedures
underway in the Government action, The Panel distinguished its
holding in Roadway Express, explaining that the crucial factor
favoring transfer there was the similarity of the class allegations
in the complaints and the Panel's desire to ensure that the possi-
bility of inconsistent class determinations was eliminated.
384 F. Supp. at 616.
In our view, the instant litigation more closely resem-
bles Roadway Express than it does Trucking Industry. All actions
presently before us involve common factual issues concerning
Ryder's racial policies in a particular part of the United States.
And three of the four actions present the possibility of conflict-
ing class determinations, while the plaintiff in the fourth, Cook,
is a potential class member in the other three. Also, all actions
share the question of the effect of a consent decree that was
entered in the Government action in Trucking Industry, to which
Ryder is a signatory. Thus, Section 1407 treatment for all actions
in this litigation is necessary in order to prevent both dupli-
cation of discovery and inconsistent pretrial rulings.

] Case MDL No. 220 Document 2 Filed 05/01/15 Page 5 of 6
. 5.
Plaintiff Cook's concern about the possibility of
Section 1407 proceedings causing additional expense because of
counsel's travel to the transferee district is unwarranted.
Since plaintiff Cook appears to share substantially similar
interests with the plaintiffs in the other three actions, the
judicieus use of liaison counsel, lead counsel and steering
committees could eliminate any need for plaintiff's counsel
to travel to the transferee district. See Manual for Complex
Litigation, Part I, Sections 1.90-1.93 (rev. ed. 1973).
The Northern District of Georgia is clearly the most
appropriate transferee forum for this litigation. The judge
to whom the action in that district is assigned has already
ruled on a request for class certification and thus has had
an opportunity to become familiar with the facts and issues involved
in this litigation, which will enable him to supervise it &oward
its most just and expeditious termination.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the actions listed on
the following Schedule A and pending in districts other than
the Northern District of Georgia be, and the same hereby are,
transferred to the Northern District of Georgia and, with the
consent	of that court, assigned to the Honorable Charles A. Moye,
Jr. for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. §1407 with the action pending in that district and
listed on Schedule A.

, Case MDL No. 220 Document 2 Filed 05/01/15 Page 6 of 6
SCHEDULE A DOCKET NO. 220
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
George E. Scott, et al. v. Ryder Truck Civil Action
I.ines, Inc., et al. No. 17,661
| MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
Naran Buchanan, et al. v. Ryder Truck Civil Action
Lines, Inc., et al. No. 7320
Jacob T. Cook, Jr. v. Ryder Truck Civil Action
Lines, Inc. No. 74-421-NA-CV
WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE .
Frank Netter, Jr., etc. V. Ryder Truck Civil Action .
Lines, Inc., et al. No. 74-554