666 F. App'x 517
6th Cir.2016Background
- Sarah Zeller, hired in March 2011 as a customs analyst for CN Customs Brokerage Services (CNCB), worked in a shared trailer at a Grand Trunk Western (GTW) rail yard; CNCB was an indirectly owned subsidiary within the CN corporate family.
- From May–November 2012 Zeller alleges multiple incidents of sexual harassment and threatening notes left on her car; she reported some incidents internally beginning in September 2012 and later to GTW police.
- CNCB (and CN-affiliated HR) investigated beginning in September; measures taken included interviews, preserving notes, arranging that Zeller not work alone, installing locks/keypads and cameras, and involving GTW police. Zeller later took extended leave and resigned.
- Zeller filed an EEOC Charge naming only “CN Railroad”; she later sued CNCB, CNR, GTW, Stellar Distribution Services, and others under Title VII, FELA, and related claims. Defendants moved for summary judgment.
- The district court dismissed Title VII claims against Stellar, GTW, ICRC, and CNR for failure to exhaust administrative remedies; dismissed Title VII claim against CNCB/CNR on the merits (and held CNCB may have <15 employees); and dismissed Zeller’s FELA claim against CNR for lack of evidence of a master–servant relationship. The Sixth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Zeller exhausted administrative remedies as to Stellar | The EEOC Intake/Charge and questionnaire placed Stellar on notice; Stellar is part of the CN operation | Stellar was not named in the formal EEOC Charge and had no identity-of-interest such that it received adequate notice | Affirmed: Zeller failed to exhaust Title VII claims vs. Stellar; Charge did not provide notice to Stellar |
| Whether CNCB/CNR are liable under Title VII for non-supervisor harassment (adequacy/promptness of remedial response) | CNCB/CNR unreasonably delayed and conducted inadequate investigation and remedies after reports beginning June 2012 | CNCB/CNR promptly investigated after September complaint and took reasonable corrective steps (schedule changes, surveillance, locks, cameras, police) | Affirmed: no genuine issue that employer response was reasonable; Title VII claims fail on merits |
| Whether CNCB is a covered employer under Title VII (15-employee threshold) | Implicit: CNCB is employer subject to Title VII | District court found CNCB had fewer than 15 employees; appellate decision resolves claim on merits regardless of coverage | Appellate court affirmed Title VII dismissal on merits; coverage issue unnecessary to the final disposition |
| Whether CNR is Zeller’s employer under FELA (master–servant / borrowed- or dual-servant theories) | CNR had supervisory/control ties (shared handbook, CN oversight, senior CNR employee supervised CNCB operations and extended offer) creating fact issue on control | No evidence CNR paid, disciplined, or directly supervised Zeller; CNCB was distinct and acted independently | Affirmed: insufficient evidence of master–servant relationship to raise FELA question; FELA claim fails as a matter of law |
Key Cases Cited
- Fed. Express Corp. v. Holowecki, 552 U.S. 389 (2008) (EEOC intake documents can qualify as a charge only when reasonably construed as request for agency action)
- Hafford v. Seidner, 183 F.3d 506 (6th Cir. 1999) (employer liable for coworker harassment only if it knew or should have known and failed to take prompt, appropriate corrective action)
- Clark v. UPS, Inc., 400 F.3d 341 (6th Cir. 2005) (components of an effective anti-harassment policy include requiring supervisors to report incidents)
- Kelley v. Southern Pacific Co., 419 U.S. 318 (1974) (FELA employment can be established under borrowed-servant, dual-servant, or subservant theories)
- Baker v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co., 359 U.S. 227 (1959) (evidence of railroad supervision can raise a jury question on FELA employer status)