In March of 2013, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky decided a case that involved an employee at the Northern Kentucky University who felt that she was discriminated against and not given several different promotions because of her gender. (See Meyers v. Northern Kentucky University, 2013 WL 954230 (E.D. KY 2013)). In this case the plaintiff was hired by the defendant as an Assistant Professor in the History Department in 2001. Id.
In 2010 a job opened up where plaintiff and 3 other employees applied for the job. A search committee voted unanimously to not advance plaintiff due to her poor communication skills and confrontational interactions with others. Id. Later in 2010 another job opened up that plaintiff applied for and she was short listed for the job. But, after a telephone interview, the search committee again did not give her the job. So, on May 24, 2011, the plaintiff filed a charge with the EEOC claiming gender discrimination for the two positions she did not get. Id. It is not clear if she did this on her own or with the help of a Kentucky gender discrimination lawyer.
At the end of the 2011-2012 school year another employee resigned due to health issues. Plaintiff applied for the job but did not get it. A male employee did. So, plaintiff thinking that she had a Kentucky gender discrimination case filed a second charge with the EEOC alleging gender discrimination and retaliation. After that, plaintiff requested from her department coordinator for her employer to pay $2,000 tuition for her religion courses she wanted to take at another college. Shortly after, plaintiff filed her complaint for Kentucky gender discrimination and retaliation and age discrimination.
Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the Kentucky gender discrimination lawsuit. Plaintiff withdrew all claims except her claim for retaliation based on the denial for tuition.
The court first looked to see if the Kentucky gender discrimination plaintiff had exhausted all of her administrative remedies first before filing the lawsuit. The court held that she had in that the retaliation claim was reasonably foreseeable and therefore plaintiff was not required to file yet another EEOC charge. Id.
“To establish a prima facie case of retaliation, plaintiff must establish that: 1) she engaged in activity protected by Title VII, 2, the exercise of her civil rights was known to the defendant, 3) thereafter, the defendant took an employment action adverse to the plaintiff, and 4) there was a causal connection between the protected activity and the adverse employment action.” (cites omitted).
This court held that plaintiff could not prove retaliation because there was no evidence that the person who denied the tuition request knew of plaintiff’s protected activity. In fact, it was shown that the person responding to her request made it very clear that the school did not do this for her or for any other employee who may have asked. It was the school’s policy to not do so.
If you have been the subject of a Kentucky gender discrimination case, please call and speak to a Kentucky gender discrimination lawyer at the Law Offices of Andrew Alitowski, P.A. at 888-ASK-ANDREW (275-2637) or contact us. We are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
If you are injured…Ask Andrew!!!