992 F.3d 557
6th Cir.2021Background
- Massey worked as a security guard for Detroit Water (2004–2015) and was rehired by Great Lakes Water Authority after a 2016 transfer; several supervisors from Detroit Water (including alleged harassers) continued as Great Lakes supervisors.
- Massey reported repeated derogatory remarks about her breasts, comments that she needed a more supportive bra, mockery about being "sloppy," and prior invasive conduct at Detroit Water (a female employee was told to feel inside Massey’s shirt to check for a bra).
- At Great Lakes Massey reported harassment to HR; afterwards management investigated a coworkers complaint about Massey instead; HR discussed how to communicate with her.
- In October 2017 a Great Lakes van driven by Massey suffered front-end damage; investigators concluded Massey falsified her incident report by not reporting an accident; she was suspended and then terminated in December 2017.
- Massey filed EEOC charges, then suit alleging hostile work environment and retaliation under Title VII and Michigans ELCRA, and FMLA retaliation; bankruptcy led the Chapter 7 trustee (Nathan) to be substituted as plaintiff; the district court granted summary judgment for Great Lakes and the Sixth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hostile-work-environment (Title VII & ELCRA) | Massey was subjected to sex-based harassment (comments targeting her breasts, bra comments, mocking) that Great Lakes failed to remedy | Great Lakes: comments were isolated, not sufficiently severe or pervasive and merely had sexual content | Court: "based on sex" could be shown ("but for" sex), but harassment was not objectively severe or pervasive; summary judgment affirmed |
| Retaliation for opposing harassment (Title VII & ELCRA) | Temporal proximity and supervisor comments show firing was retaliation for complaints | Great Lakes: legitimate nondiscriminatory reasonMassey falsified incident report; employer honestly believed falsification | Court: even assuming prima facie case, Great Lakes had an "honest belief" in the falsification; summary judgment affirmed |
| FMLA retaliation | Massey took FMLA leave (intermittent asthma; breast surgery leave asserted) and was fired because of that leave | Great Lakes: same legitimate reason (falsified report); plaintiff cannot show pretext | Court: plaintiff fails to show pretext; same honest-belief analysis applies; summary judgment affirmed |
| Successor liability (concurrence) | Successor liability could allow considering pre-Great Lakes incidents (Detroit Water) as part of the hostile-environment calculus | Great Lakes: not argued below; parties treated Great Lakes as a separate employer | Concurrence: doctrine might have altered the severe-or-pervasive analysis, but successor liability was not raised or briefed and so was not considered |
Key Cases Cited
- Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Servs., 523 U.S. 75 (1998) (sex-based harassment includes conduct that would not occur but for victims sex)
- Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (1993) (objective/subjective "severe or pervasive" standard for hostile work environment)
- Meritor Sav. Bank, FSB v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986) (foundation for hostile-work-environment liability)
- Williams v. CSX Transp. Co., 643 F.3d 502 (6th Cir. 2011) ("but for" causation in sex-based harassment; framework for elements)
- Bostock v. Clayton County, 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020) (but-for causation standard for Title VII discrimination)
- Clay v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 501 F.3d 695 (6th Cir. 2007) (honest-belief rule and summary-judgment context for pretext analysis)
- Bowman v. Shawnee State Univ., 220 F.3d 456 (6th Cir. 2000) (examples of conduct insufficiently severe or pervasive)
- Loyd v. St. Joseph Mercy Oakland, 766 F.3d 580 (6th Cir. 2014) (pre-termination investigation need not be perfect under honest-belief rule)