Female Worker's $500,000 Retaliation Judgment Upheld

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a judgment of over $500,000, including $300,000 in punitive damages and more than $150,000 in attorney fees, to a female employee of FedEx SmartPost Inc. based on her male manager's alleged retaliation against her.

The plaintiff worked for FedEx in Belleville, Mich., from September 2006 to December 2014. She was hired as a part-time parcel assistant in 2006 and promoted to a full-time parcel sorter in 2007. In 2010, she was promoted to lead parcel sorter, a nonmanagement position that involved some supervisory responsibilities.

Early in 2011, a male supervisor took over as the plaintiff's hub manager. The plaintiff testified that in August 2011, the supervisor suggested that she demote herself to an administrative role because he felt that females are better suited to administrative roles, and males are better suited to leadership roles. Later on, she claimed he repeated the suggestion and said that if she did not take the demotion, things would continue to get harder for her.

Before this meeting, the plaintiff had never been subject to disciplinary action and received several awards and certificates for her performance from 2007 to 2010. After the meeting, the plaintiff's supervisors took several actions that made her job harder, including assigning low-performing parcel sorters to her area, limiting her support staff, and giving her multiple and conflicting work assignments.

The plaintiff received her first written discipline in July 2012, then another in September 2012. She contested the factual basis for both. She also received a poor performance review for fiscal year 2012, which she contested, as well. The plaintiff complained to HR about her performance review and her supervisor's comment that he thought women were not suited for leadership or management roles.

She claimed that rather than address her concerns about discrimination, the HR manager told her that maybe she just had a bad review and to keep her head down and let the managers do their jobs. The plaintiff continued to be subject to disciplinary actions that she believed to be unwarranted. In August 2013, she was demoted to parcel sorter.

In November 2013, she filed a sex-discrimination and retaliation complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). After she filed this complaint, she claimed that she was watched more closely by management. She disputed the validity of various disciplinary actions she had received. At some point after she was demoted, she was told that she could not clock in more than three minutes early or work more than eight hours in a day.

In March 2014, the plaintiff filed a second complaint with the EEOC, alleging retaliation. She testified that after she filed this second complaint, her managers instructed security guards to monitor how long she was taking on her bathroom breaks. She was disciplined for purportedly unexcused absences, even though she provided notes from her doctor excusing these absences.

In 2014, the plaintiff was not given extra hours during peak time. She received disciplinary write-ups for leaving early when other workers left early without discipline or when she had prior permission. In December 2014, the plaintiff was fired, supposedly for leaving work early.

The plaintiff filed suit against FedEx in October 2014, shortly before she was fired. FedEx moved for summary judgment on all claims. The district court granted the motion as to the hostile work environment claim and partially dismissed the retaliation claim, finding that only FedEx's alleged refusal to allow the plaintiff to clock in and out at the same time as other employees was sufficiently adverse to support a retaliation claim for filing an EEOC complaint.

[SHRM members-only toolkit: Managing Equal Employment Opportunity]

After the district court decided the summary-judgment motion, it consolidated the plaintiff's state-law claims and the federal claims into a single case. At trial, the plaintiff succeeded on her retaliation claim and was awarded $85,000 in back and front pay, $30,000 in emotional distress damages, more than $300,000 in punitive damages, and more than $150,000 in attorney fees. FedEx appealed the decision to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The 6th Circuit found sufficient evidence of retaliation to support the judgment, despite the district court's improper narrowing of the retaliation claim. It further found that punitive damages were appropriate, even though FedEx claimed to have enforced its anti-discrimination policy, because the evidence showed that HR had not investigated the plaintiff's complaint.

Hubbell v. FedEx SmartPost Inc., 6th Cir., Nos. 18-1373/1727 (Aug. 5, 2019).

Professional Pointer: Employers should closely monitor disciplinary actions by supervisors against employees who have complained about their treatment, and they should have HR investigate any claims of discrimination or retaliation. Failure to do so can result in substantial liability.

Jeffrey Rhodes is an attorney with Doumar Martin in Arlington, Va.