908 F. Supp. 2d 1165
D.N.M.2012Background
- Albuquerque car dealership Pitre, Inc. allegedly tolerated severe male-on-male sexual harassment over ~12 years, creating a hostile environment.
- Gallegos, a Pitre employee, engaged in explicit sexual acts, exposing himself, and coercive conduct toward male coworkers.
- EEOC sued on behalf of male Charging Parties for pattern or practice harassment and retaliation, seeking injunctive and damages under Title VII and the 1991 Act; Yob and Dulkerian intervened.
- Pitre challenged EEOC’s pattern-or-practice theory and proposed bifurcation or dismissal of the §707 claim; EEOC moved to bifurcate discovery/trial.
- The court consolidated motions, held that EEOC may proceed under pattern-or-practice framework via §706, rejected bifurcation claims premised on misreading the law, and ordered Phase I/II bifurcated trial structure with punitive damages tied to Phase II.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether EEOC may pursue pattern-or-practice under §706 | EEOC may use pattern-or-practice under §706 to address systemic harassment | Pitre asserts pattern-or-practice under §707 only or requires §707 isolation | Yes; EEOC may proceed under pattern-or-practice via §706 |
| Whether EEOC must plead intent to rely on pattern-or-practice | Swierkiewicz allows pleading to be general; intent not required | EEOC should plead intent to rely on pattern-or-practice | Not required; complaint need plausibly show Title VII relief, not evidentiary framework |
| Appropriateness of bifurcation in this pattern-or-practice case | Bifurcation aids efficiency given common course of conduct | Bifurcation would hamper defense and is inappropriate for harassment claims | Granted in part; adopt Jenson-style bifurcation with Phase I focusing on pattern/intent and objective elements, Phase II on individual liability and damages |
| Order of proof for Phase I vs Phase II; punitive damages timing | Phase I may address pattern and malice; Phase II cover damages and individual liability; punitive may be addressed in Phase I or II | Punitive damages should be limited to Phase II or treated separately | Phase I: determine pattern, policy, and malice; Phase II: individual liability and damages; punitive damages tied to Phase I findings but proven with individual showings |
Key Cases Cited
- Gen. Tel. Co. of the Nw., Inc. v. EEOC, 446 U.S. 318 (U.S. 1980) (EEOC authority and overlap of §706 and §707 acknowledged)
- Waffle House, Inc. v., 534 U.S. 279 (U.S. 2002) (pattern-or-practice framework matters in comprehensive enforcement)
- Serrano v. Cintas Corp., 699 F.3d 884 (6th Cir. 2012) (EEOC may pursue pattern-or-practice under §706 authority (overlaps with §707))