493 F. App'x 690
6th Cir.2012Background
- Szeinbach appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing Title VII retaliation and retaliation-by-association claims against OSU.
- The district court held no adverse employment action established; the court affirmed in part and reversed/remanded in part.
- OSU hired Szeinbach in 1999 as a tenured full professor in COP; Seoane-Vasquez joined COP in 2002 and later sued OSU for discrimination in 2007.
- Szeinbach sued in 2008 alleging retaliation for supporting Seoane’s charges and for associating with Seoane; she pointed to actions by Balkrishnan, Nahata, and Brueggemeier.
- Discovery issues highlighted spoliation concerns; a year-long investigation into Szeinbach’s publications occurred, with emails circulated by Balkrishnan.
- On appeal, the court affirmed dismissal overall but reversed on two specific claims for potential adverse action: differential salary increases and the research-misconduct investigation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether differential-salary increases are adverse action | Szeinbach, a 1% pay-gap case, was adverse. | Salary differences were de minimis and not adverse. | Remanded; not barred—fact question remains. |
| Whether the research-misconduct investigation constitutes adverse action | Investigation harmed professional advancement. | Not an adverse action. | Remanded; disputed impact on career. |
| Whether remaining coworker actions and program changes amount to adverse action | Some changes and retaliation by coworkers were adverse. | Not adverse under Burlington Northern. | Affirmed for these claims; no adverse action found. |
Key Cases Cited
- Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53 (U.S. 2006) (material adversity standard for retaliation claims)
- Hawkins v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 517 F.3d 321 (6th Cir. 2008) (co-worker retaliation liability framework; knowledge and condonation)
- White v. Baxter Healthcare Corp., 533 F.3d 381 (6th Cir. 2008) (downstream impact of downgraded performance on pay; adverse action)
- Spengler v. Worthington Cylinders, 615 F.3d 481 (6th Cir. 2010) (prima facie retaliation framework; McDonnell Douglas shift in burden)
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (U.S. 1973) (framework for proving pretext after prima facie case)
- DiCarlo v. Potter, 358 F.3d 408 (6th Cir. 2004) (low threshold for prima facie retaliation)
- Miller v. City of Canton, 319 F. App’x 411 (6th Cir. 2009) (retaliation standard commentary in Sixth Circuit)
- Thompson v. N. Am. Stainless, LP, 131 S. Ct. 863 (2011) (clarifies deterrence standard for retaliation)