Simon Seeding & Sod, Inc. v. Dubuque Human Rights Commission and Jermaine Stapleton
130 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 183
Iowa2017Background
- Simon Seeding & Sod, a seasonal Dubuque landscaping business, employed fluctuating, partly off‑payroll workers in 2012; Jermaine Stapleton (African‑American) worked there March–May 2012 and alleged racial slurs and hostile conduct by owner Leo Simon.
- Stapleton filed a discrimination complaint with the Dubuque Human Rights Commission (DHRC); after an investigation (and delayed, incomplete payroll production by Simon Seeding) an administrative panel found hostile work environment and that the employer “regularly employed” four or more employees.
- The DHRC affirmed, increased some damages (including tripling emotional‑distress award), and awarded attorney fees; the district court affirmed and added appellate fees; Simon Seeding appealed to the Iowa Supreme Court.
- Key legal dispute: how to interpret/count “regularly employs” for the small‑employer exemption (employers who regularly employ less than four individuals are exempt under the Dubuque ordinance and Iowa Civil Rights Act).
- Agency credibility findings credited Stapleton and witnesses over Simon; payroll records showed four or more employees on payroll for multiple weeks but omitted some workers who were admitted to have worked and been paid informally.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Stapleton/DHRC) | Defendant's Argument (Simon Seeding) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether numerosity is jurisdictional | Numerosity is a merits element; agency may decide facts | Numerosity is jurisdictional and must be resolved in defendant’s favor if not met | Not jurisdictional; treated as merits fact question (Arbaugh‑style) |
| How to count employees for “regularly employs” | Use payroll‑based approach: count persons on employer’s payroll during recurring season (no 20‑week individual threshold) | Count only employees who worked at least 20 consecutive weeks (Cochran approach) | Adopted payroll approach (Walters): count employees who appear on payroll; rejected importing a 20‑week individual requirement |
| Whether substantial evidence supports finding Simon Seeding regularly employed ≥4 | Payroll records + admissions + adverse inference from withheld records support finding | Employer disputes payroll accuracy and argues insufficient evidence | Substantial evidence supports agency finding that employer regularly employed four or more during landscaping season |
| Liability and damages (hostile work environment, lost wages, emotional distress, attorney fees) | Harassing racial epithets repeated; lost wages and emotional‑distress supported by lay testimony; fees authorized by ordinance | Challenges credibility, causation, size of emotional‑distress award, and fee awards/appellate fees | Agency credibility determinations upheld; hostile work environment proven; lost wages and emotional‑distress awards supported; appellate and panel fee enhancements authorized; overall affirmance |
Key Cases Cited
- Walters v. Metropolitan Educational Enterprises, Inc., 519 U.S. 202 (Sup. Ct. 1997) (adopts payroll‑based method for counting employees under Title VII)
- Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U.S. 500 (Sup. Ct. 2006) (employee‑numerosity threshold is a merits element, not jurisdictional)
- Cochran v. Seniors Only Financial, Inc., 209 F. Supp. 2d 963 (S.D. Iowa 2002) (adopted a 20‑week individual requirement under ICRA; court here rejects that approach)
- Robinson v. Fair Employment & Housing Comm’n, 2 Cal.4th 226 (Cal. 1992) (construes “regularly employ” to mean an employer’s average/normal complement, not necessarily daily or year‑round)
- Thurber v. Jack Reilly’s, Inc., 717 F.2d 633 (1st Cir. 1983) (favored payroll approach and criticized day‑by‑day counting that excludes part‑time/seasonal hires)
- Farmland Foods, Inc. v. Dubuque Human Rights Comm’n, 672 N.W.2d 733 (Iowa 2003) (discusses hostile work environment elements and standards for severity and pervasiveness)