The Fourth Circuit has reversed summary judgment in a case brought by the EEOC, thereby allowing an African-American female to pursue her Title VII hostile work environment claim against her former employer, Central Wholesaler’s Inc.  In EEOC v. Central Wholesaler’s Inc., the EEOC alleged that the company subjected LaTonya Medley to a hostile work environment because of her gender and race.  According to the complaint, Medley was subject to multiple instances of harassment, including, among other things:  (1) hearing her co-workers use the word “b***h” on a daily basis when referring to women, (2) being referred to as a “black stupid n****r”; and (3) having to hear sounds of people having sex because her co-worker watched pornography on his work computer. 
 
Central moved for summary judgment on all of the EEOC’s claims and the district granted its motion.  In its decision the district court held that the alleged conduct was not gender-specific, “not sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a sexually hostile working environment,” and that the company conducted a “reasonable investigation under the circumstances,” with regards to Medley’s complaints that co-workers repeatedly called her n****r.  The Fourth Circuit reversed, finding that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the EEOC, could allow a reasonable jury to conclude that the harassment was:  (1) unwelcome; (2) based on Medley’s gender or race; (3) sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter conditions of Medley’s employment and create an abusive environment; and (4) imputable to Central.  Additionally, the Fourth Circuit held that a jury could find that Central’s actions were not “reasonably calculated to end the [alleged] harassment.”  In reaching its decision, the Fourth Circuit relied on the fact that Central failed to take remedial actions that “a rational jury could find would have been reasonably calculated to end the harassment,” i.e., demoting the four primary offenders, suspending them from work, reducing their pay, or issuing them written reprimands.  In sum, the Court concluded that “Central’s response was not sufficient [] to warrant summary judgment,” and thus, remanded the case to the lower court. 
 
This decision is significant because it reminds employers that remedial action and not just words, is necessary to combat harassment.  For information on race and gender-based discrimination, visit The Employment Law Group® Law Firm’s Discrimination Practice at http://employmentlawgroup.net/PracticeAreas/Discrimination-Law.asp.

This entry was posted on Thursday, July 23rd, 2009 at 6:31 pm and is filed under Race Discrimination, Sex Discrimination, Title VII Discrimination. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.