Renee Majors v. General Electric Company
714 F.3d 527
| 7th Cir. | 2013Background
- Majors, a GE Bloomington employee for 32 years, suffered a permanent lifting restriction (up to 20 pounds) after a 2000 injury.
- GE’s Bloomington plant uses a seniority-based bidding system under a union CBA to fill vacancies.
- In 2009 Majors was the senior eligible bidder for a temporary auditor position that required lifting over 20 pounds.
- Medical review concluded Majors was not medically qualified for the auditor role due to lifting restrictions.
- Majors alternatively claimed she could perform the job with accommodation; GE determined the lifting requirement was essential and not reasonably accommodated.
- Majors later sought a permanent auditor position but again was found unqualified; she filed EEOC charges alleging disability and sex discrimination and retaliation, then retired under a special early retirement program.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| ADA discrimination based on disability in hiring/advancement | Majors is qualified with accommodation. | Lifting over 20 pounds is essential; she is not qualified. | No genuine dispute she isn’t a qualified individual. |
| Whether GE failed to reasonably accommodate Majors | GE failed to provide a reasonable accommodation. | Proposed accommodation (a material handler) is not reasonable; she isn’t qualified. | No reasonable accommodation; discrimination not shown. |
| Title VII retaliation claim timeliness and scope | Retaliation occurred post-EEOC filing. | Claims limited to 300 days prior to second EEOC charge. | Retaliation claim limited to 300 days before second charge; not proven. |
| Whether evidence shows retaliation via overtime/lack-of-work Fridays | Disparities in overtime/work days show retaliation. | Differences insufficient to prove causation; no comparator evidence. | Insufficient showing of causation or pretext. |
| Constructive discharge by retirement | Extreme stress from discrimination forced retirement. | No violation; retirement voluntary and not a federal construct. | Constructive discharge not shown; judgment affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Povey v. City of Jeffersonville, Ind., 697 F.3d 619 (7th Cir. 2012) (ADA elements and disability definitions guidance)
- Gratzl v. Office of Chief Judges, 12th, 18th, 19th & 22nd Jud. Circuits, 601 F.3d 674 (7th Cir. 2010) (Reasonable accommodation and qualified individual standard)
- Oconomowoc Residential Programs, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee, 300 F.3d 775 (7th Cir. 2002) (Interactive process and facial reasonableness of accommodations)
- US Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, 535 U.S. 391 (U.S. 2002) (Reasonable accommodation standard and undue hardship framework)
- Nichols v. Southern Illinois Univ.-Edwardsville, 510 F.3d 772 (7th Cir. 2007) (Direct and indirect retaliation proof frameworks)