2:20-cv-00243
W.D. Mich.Mar 11, 2022Background:
- Plaintiff Cheri Marchello, Senior Operations Coordinator employed by Northern States Power Co.‑Wisconsin since 2004, sued under Title VII and Michigan ELCRA for sex discrimination and a sex‑based hostile work environment.
- Beginning around 2007–2010 and recurring over a decade, rumors circulated that Marchello had affairs with several male coworkers; she reported these rumors to supervisors and HR at various times.
- Additional alleged conduct included coworkers calling her derogatory names ("bitch," "slut" as reported to her), and one coworker (Soborowicz) allegedly blocking her path, shouting in her face, and glaring intimidatingly.
- Marchello experienced headaches and depression and sought therapy; in 2020 she applied for a Designer job (offered but declined) and did not apply for a later Gas Manager position.
- Marchello filed an EEOC charge on March 24, 2020; defendant moved for summary judgment. The court granted summary judgment for the defendant, dismissing all claims.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness / statute of limitations | EEOC charge filed 3/24/2020; designer offer (Oct–Dec 2020) and Jan 2020 rumor bring claims within 300‑day period and draw in earlier acts for hostile‑work claim | Earlier incidents are time‑barred; claims should be dismissed as untimely | Claims are timely: discrete promotion‑related acts within period; Jan 2020 rumor timely and pulls related prior acts into hostile‑work claim |
| Failure to promote / sex discrimination | Harassment blocked advancement and deterred application for Gas Manager; designer offer shows disfavor | Marchello did not apply for Gas Manager; she voluntarily declined Designer offer; promoted individual was also female; no adverse action shown | Plaintiff failed to establish prima facie failure‑to‑promote or adverse action; discrimination claim dismissed |
| Hostile work environment (severity/pervasiveness) | Repeated rumors over >10 years, derogatory name‑calling, and intimidating conduct created abusive environment and caused psychological harm | Comments and gossip were isolated, hearsay, or "offensive utterances," not severe or pervasive enough to be actionable | Court held incidents were mostly offensive utterances spread over a decade and insufficiently severe or pervasive objectively; hostile‑work claim dismissed |
| Employer liability / adequacy of employer response | HR failed to stop recurring rumors and hostile atmosphere | HR investigated the Jan 2020 rumor and reviewed complaints; evidence insufficient to show employer liability | Plaintiff did not carry burden to show employer liable; summary judgment for defendant on employer‑liability ground |
Key Cases Cited
- Nat’l R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101 (2002) (distinguishes discrete acts from continuing hostile‑work environment for timeliness)
- Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (1993) (sets factors for determining hostile or abusive work environment)
- Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Servs., 523 U.S. 75 (1998) (Title VII covers workplace harassment based on sex, including same‑sex harassment)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (summary judgment standard)
- Clay v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 501 F.3d 695 (6th Cir. 2007) (severity/pervasiveness analysis; offensive utterances may be insufficient)
- Nathan v. Great Lakes Water Auth., 992 F.3d 557 (6th Cir. 2021) (recent Sixth Circuit application of hostile‑work environment standard)
- Logan v. MGM Grand Detroit Casino, 939 F.3d 824 (6th Cir. 2019) (EEOC filing period in deferral jurisdictions)
- Sumpter v. Wayne Cnty., 868 F.3d 473 (6th Cir. 2017) (court need not comb record to find plaintiff’s evidence)