 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Boyle v. Alum-Line8/17/2005
Julie Boyle appeals adverse verdicts in her sexual discrimination and retaliatory discharge claims. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.
Heard by Vogel, P.J., and Miller and Hecht, JJ.
Julie Boyle appeals the adverse verdicts in her sexual discrimination and retaliatory discharge claims brought under both the federal and state civil rights acts. Boyle contends the district court erred in (1) instructing the jury on the effect her "at will" employment had on defendant Alum-Line, Inc.'s (Alum-Line) ability to terminate her employment, (2) denying her Iowa Civil Rights Act (ICRA) claim for retaliatory discharge without making any factual findings, and (3) denying her ICRA claim for sexual harassment in the work place without determining and applying the proper standard of proof. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.
I. Background Facts and Proceedings
Boyle was hired by Alum-Line to work as a welder and became the first female employee to work in Alum-Line's "plant-two." Boyle's foreman was Wayne Hansmeier, who was supervised by the manager of plant two, Chris Orr, who, in turn, was supervised by Gary Gooder, the president of Alum-Line. Boyle alleged that while working at plant two, her co-workers exposed her to pornographic pictures, lewd and demeaning sexual comments, and even subjected her to unwanted physical contact. Boyle further asserted that not only did Hansmeier approve of the inappropriate behavior of her co-workers by laughing at it, but that he had actually participated by addressing her in a lewd and demeaning manner.
Boyle claims she eventually went to Gooder's office to complain and was told to see Orr. When Boyle approached Orr, she was told the situation was under investigation. Approximately one week later Boyle met with Orr and Gooder and was handed a written notice terminating her employment. The notice, which was signed by both Hansmeier and Orr, stated the reason for Boyle's termination was complaints by her co-employees indicating they were uncomfortable working with her because she was sexually harassing them.
Boyle filed a petition seeking damages under both the federal and state civil rights act for sexual discrimination through a hostile work environment and retaliatory discharge. The federal claims were tried to a jury while the state claims were simultaneously tried to the district court. At the conclusion of the trial, Boyle's trial counsel failed to object to the district court's decision not to instruct the jury on her retaliatory discharge claim and therefore the jury never reached the issue. While the jury was deliberating on the Title VII case, the district court gave Boyle an opportunity to present "any matters related to the plaintiff's claim against the defendant that were not submitted to the jury that are required by Iowa law to be decided by the Trial Court without a jury . . . ." Boyle, however, did not present any further argument or raise the retaliatory discharge issue, even when given the opportunity to do so after Alum-Line expressed its view that the issue had not been raised.
The jury was given special interrogatories in which they found: (1) Boyle was subjected to sexual harassment by offensive sexual language and conduct, (2) the conduct was based on gender, (3) the conduct was directed at her and was unwelcome and uninvited, (4) the conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive so that a reasonable person would find Boyle's work environment to be hostile, (5) Alum-Line knew of the sexual harassment, but that (6) Boyle did not prove Alum-Line failed to take steps reasonably calculated to stop the sexual harassment. The district co
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Iowa Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|