McKinley Lambert v. Peri Formworks System, Incorpo
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 14990
| 7th Cir. | 2013Background
- Lambert, an African-American Peri yard worker (later promoted to yard lead), alleges years of sexual harassment by co-worker Hugo Robledo and repeated racial slurs by supervisors at Peri’s Calumet Park yard.
- Lambert complained repeatedly to on-site yard leads (Jesus Santiago and Redalfo Avila) and once to logistics manager Robert Wallace; on-site complaints were not acted on.
- Peri adopted a written sexual-harassment reporting policy in May 2005 directing complaints to an off-site HR manager (Tami Osheroff) or the CEO; Lambert did not use those channels before some of the reported misconduct.
- On May 3, 2007, supervisors observed Lambert behaving erratically, sent him for a reasonable-suspicion alcohol test, which showed a 0.10% BAC, and Peri immediately terminated him under its no-tolerance policy.
- Lambert sued under Title VII and § 1981 for sexual and racial hostile-work-environment, racial discrimination, and retaliatory discharge; the district court granted summary judgment for Peri on all claims.
- The Seventh Circuit affirmed dismissal of discrimination and retaliation claims but reversed as to the sexual- and racial-harassment claims, finding triable issues on hostile-work-environment and employer notice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether co‑worker sexual conduct created a hostile work environment based on sex | Lambert: repeated sexual comments, touching, exposure by co‑worker created severe or pervasive harassment; he complained to yard leads who did nothing | Peri: complaints were made only to yard leads (not authorized to remedy) and Lambert did not use written/off‑site reporting required by policy | Reversed: triable issue whether complaining to yard leads reasonably put employer on notice and whether behavior was severe/pervasive |
| Whether racial remarks created a hostile work environment | Lambert: supervisors and others repeatedly used racial epithets and derogatory labels, including a direct slur to him | Peri: remarks were isolated, not directed at Lambert, not physically threatening, and insufficiently severe or pervasive | Reversed: fact issues exist—crediting Lambert could support hostile‑work‑environment finding |
| Whether termination was discriminatory (race) | Lambert: termination followed his complaints and some discharged-for-intoxication employees were African‑American, suggesting disparate treatment | Peri: termination based on a positive alcohol test and no‑tolerance policy; no evidence of disparate testing or pretext | Affirmed: no circumstantial evidence of discriminatory motive or pretext; legitimate non‑discriminatory reason supported by test result |
| Whether termination was retaliatory for complaints | Lambert: he complained about harassment and alleged retaliation via firing | Peri: contemporaneous reasonable‑suspicion observations prompted testing and firing; no timing/disparate treatment evidence | Affirmed: no evidence of retaliatory intent; neutral test result and consistent application of policy |
Key Cases Cited
- Harris N.A. v. Hershey, 711 F.3d 794 (7th Cir. 2013) (standard of review for summary judgment in employment cases)
- Vance v. Ball State Univ., 133 S. Ct. 2434 (U.S. 2013) (defining when a supervisor’s harassment is imputed to employer)
- Erickson v. Wis. Dep’t of Corr., 469 F.3d 600 (7th Cir. 2006) (elements of hostile work environment claims)
- Burlington Indus. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (U.S. 1998) (affirmative defense to employer liability for supervisor harassment)
- Parkins v. Civil Constructors of Ill., Inc., 163 F.3d 1027 (7th Cir. 1998) (when complaints to lower‑level managers can constitute employer notice)
- Young v. Bayer Corp., 123 F.3d 672 (7th Cir. 1997) (practical focus on who can be expected to refer complaints up the chain)
- Chaney v. Plainfield Healthcare Ctr., 612 F.3d 908 (7th Cir. 2010) (standards for race‑based hostile work environment)
- Peters v. Renaissance Hotel Operating Co., 307 F.3d 535 (7th Cir. 2002) (discussion of severity/pervasiveness factors in hostile‑work‑environment analysis)
- Coleman v. Donahoe, 667 F.3d 835 (7th Cir. 2012) (types of circumstantial evidence relevant to discriminatory/retaliatory intent)