## Facts

- Madison Square Garden hired cleaners and event laborers; access to certain laborer positions depended in part on referrals controlled by Local Union No. 3, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.
- Black and Hispanic applicants alleged that Local 3’s referral system excluded them from jobs and work opportunities at the Garden.
- The district court certified Title VII classes (including a class of Black cleaners employed or seeking employment after February 14, 1973) and found statistically significant underrepresentation of Black and Hispanic workers in positions affected by Local 3’s practices.
- Plaintiffs pursued claims under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981; related 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) claims were dismissed at the district court based on Supreme Court authority limiting use of § 1985(3) to enforce Title VII-created rights.
- After finding Local 3 liable under Title VII and § 1981, the district court ordered retroactive seniority, back pay, front pay, interest, and attorneys’ fees, producing a total monetary award exceeding $1 million.
- Local 3 was the sole appellant and challenged both the liability findings and the scope and computation of the remedies.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court clearly erred in finding that Local 3’s referral practices violated Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981 by discriminating against Black and Hispanic workers.
2. Whether the district court’s classwide remedies—retroactive seniority, back pay, front pay, and attorneys’ fees—were properly structured and calculated, including assumptions used to estimate the number of “rightful” hires and allocation among class members.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit affirmed the determination of liability under Title VII and § 1981, holding that the discrimination findings were not clearly erroneous.
- The court upheld the availability of broad make-whole relief (including retroactive seniority and monetary remedies) in principle.
- The court modified aspects of the remedial methodology and remanded for recalculation/adjustment where the district court’s assumptions and allocations required refinement to avoid speculative or improperly measured awards.
- The court indicated that attorneys’ fee determinations could require reconsideration to the extent the underlying relief was altered on remand.

## Legal Principles

- A labor union that controls referrals or access to employment opportunities may be liable under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981 for discriminatory referral practices that exclude protected groups.
- Appellate review of a district court’s discrimination findings is deferential; findings based on statistical and testimonial proof will be upheld absent clear error even if the appellate court views the evidence as less persuasive.
- Title VII and § 1981 remedies aim to make victims whole; retroactive seniority, back pay, and front pay are permissible equitable tools but must be carefully tailored and calculated on a non-speculative basis.
- After Supreme Court limitations on § 1985(3), Title VII-created rights generally may not be enforced through § 1985(3).

## Conclusion

The Second Circuit left intact the union’s liability for discriminatory referral practices under Title VII and § 1981, while requiring adjustments to portions of the classwide seniority and monetary relief to ensure the remedies reflected supported, properly measured make-whole compensation.


Ingram v. Madison Square Garden Ctr., Inc., 709 F.2d 807 (2d Cir. 1983)