Adverse employment action affecting compensation, terms, conditions, privileges, or status

basis: triable; claim: (a)(1); 2000e-3(a)

Prior to the reorganization, all plaintiffs worked the midnight shift on a permanent basis and received the night differential (4% of the officer’s base pay).

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

In addition, plaintiffs argue that they lost overtime opportunities when they were forced to work rotating shifts because they could not routinely testify in court during the day.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Moreover, plaintiffs were precluded from maintaining other part-time work and incurred additional expenses for childcare that they did not incur prior to the reorganization.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

An employee suffers an adverse employment action if he experiences “materially adverse consequences affecting the terms, conditions, or privileges, of employment or future employment opportunities such that a reasonable trier of fact could find objectively tangible harm.”

Evidence kind: rule; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 1 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Similar to Freedman, it is hard to say that a change from a permanent midnight shift to a rotating shift where one’s schedule changes every month is not a change in the conditions or privileges of employment sufficient to constitute an adverse employment action.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: conceded; claim: (a)(1)

Mirth returned to Glenn and told him to punch out for the day because he was terminated.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

In establishing the third element of his prima facie case, Glenn need only show that he was discharged from a position for which he was qualified.

Evidence kind: rule; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

In this case, the fact that Glenn was discharged is undisputed.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: no-evidence; claim: (a)(1)

He resigned his employment with The Bancroft the following day, approximately two weeks after he had submitted his complaint about Seznec.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

On October, 10, 2014, Martinelli interviewed with another restaurant and was hired that same day.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: cuts-against; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Indeed, Martinelli had an opportunity to address his perceived ostracism by submitting complaints to Human Resources or speaking to the managers directly.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: cuts-against; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

To establish a claim for constructive discharge, a plaintiff must demonstrate that he was subjected to conditions "so severe and oppressive" that a reasonable person in that position would have been compelled to resign.

Evidence kind: rule; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

A reasonable person in Martinelli's position would not have felt that the alleged ostracism and general uncomfortable environment was so severe and oppressive as to compel him or her to resign.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: pleaded; claim: (a)

According to Plaintiff, this assignment was meant to end in August 2015.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Her employer took an adverse action against her by terminating her employment earlier than expected.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: pleaded; claim: (a)

In response to being placed on probation, Beck quit her job with Figeac later that day.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Benaoum allegedly displayed physically violent tendencies.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

A plaintiff must show that a reasonable person would be compelled to resign due to conditions that were objectively intolerable created by the illegal discriminatory conduct of the employer.

Evidence kind: rule; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

These facts, assumed as true, might make a reasonable employee feel compelled to resign.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Beck has stated a plausible claim for constructive discharge.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: conceded; claim: (a)(1)

Henderson was informed he did not get the job on February 28.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Higgins, who is white, received the highest scores of all the candidates, with a 94 from Martin and a 93 from Emde.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: conceded; claim: (a)

18. Less than one week later, on May 1, 1981, Turner received notice that he would not be rehired.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

32. On May 1,1981, Goetzman was notified that he would not be rehired.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: conceded; claim: (a)(1),(c)(3),(m); 2000e(j); 2000e-3(a)

Breech received a written warning for his failure to report to work on November 24 and was advised that future failure to report to work would be met with increasingly severe discipline.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Breech failed to report on June 15th; subsequently, he received a reprimand and a three-day suspension.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Breech met with Shelby Walker, Ron Campbell, and Wayne Sheffield (Vice President of Local 345) on July 24, 1991 at which time he was notified that his employment with APC was terminated.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: conceded; claim: (a)(2); party: plaintiff applicant for police officer, 5 feet tall, first on the women-only list; count: second rejection, from the women-only list; the only count on appeal; subject: party=plaintiff applicant for police officer, 5 feet tall, first on the women-only list; count=second rejection, from the women-only list; the only count on appeal

Although plaintiff’s name appeared first on the list, she was rejected because she did not meet the height requirement.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: conceded; claim: (a); 2000e(k)

As she was leaving for the funeral, Leona noticed Babich packing up Doe’s personal belongings from her desk.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Doe called Kohl who told her that she had been discharged.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: no-evidence; claim: (a)(1); 2000e-3(a); count: resignation (May 2014); theory: constructive discharge; subject: count=resignation (May 2014); theory=constructive discharge

Upon her return, Dr. Palma-teer increased Dr. Hiatt’s weekly clinical hours from 22 to 24 hours.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

She also required Dr. Hiatt to provide a doctor’s note to justify non-Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) sick leave, obtain permission before “blocking her schedule” (i.e., make certain blocks of time in her calendar unavailable for clinical appointments), and make up for missed clinical time.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

On May 30, 2014, Dr. Hiatt submitted a letter of resignation, in which she complained of retaliation for filing her internal EEO and EEOC complaints.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

“To establish constructive discharge, a plaintiff must show that she had no other choice but to quit.”

Evidence kind: rule; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 1 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

The working conditions she describes—such as being required to work two extra hours per week, turn in timely case notes, and justify non-FMLA sick time—do not amount to an objectively intolerable working environment.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: no-evidence; claim: (a)(1); 2000e-3(a); count: differential workplace requirements after return from leave (2014); subject: count=differential workplace requirements after return from leave (2014)

She suggests Ross Artwohl and Kimberly Mercer as relevant comparators because, like she did, they reported to Dr. Palmateer.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Dr. Hiatt also proposes Dr. Fogle and Dr. Mathewson because Dr. Palmateer supervised them and the same professional standards applied to them as to Dr. Hiatt.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

But because Dr. Hiatt supervised these two individuals, they were not in positions comparable to Dr. Hiatt.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: cuts-against; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

An employee is similarly situated to the plaintiff if the employee shares the same supervisor, is subject to the same standards governing performance evaluation and discipline, and has similar relevant employment circumstances, such as work history.

Evidence kind: rule; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Dr. Hiatt has failed to identify any other similarly situated employees who allegedly received differential treatment.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: law; claim: (a)(1); 2000e-3(a); count: demotion (Feb.-Mar. 2013); failure to reinstate supervisory duties (Aug. 2013); subject: count=demotion (Feb.-Mar. 2013); failure to reinstate supervisory duties (Aug. 2013)

Dr. Kent presented Dr. Hiatt with three options: (1) resign; (2) be demoted and undergo six months of outside counseling about her supervisory style; or (3) remain in her position and allow Human Resources (“HR”) to handle the matter.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

In her new position as Staff Psychologist/Outreach Coordinator, Dr. Hiatt was paid $58,000— a $2,000 reduction in pay from her previous position.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

For discrimination claims, “[a]n adverse employment action is a significant change in employment status, such as hiring, firing, failing to promote, reassignment with significantly different responsibilities, or a decision causing a significant change in benefits.”

Evidence kind: rule; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 1 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

A reasonable person in Dr. Hiatt’s position would view her demotion to Outreach Coordinator, coupled with a salary decrease of $2,000, as an adverse employment action.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

For the foregoing reasons, the only actions that qualify as adverse employment actions against Dr. Hiatt were (1) the demotion and (2) the failure to reinstate her supervisory duties.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: conceded; claim: (a)

Spencer earned about $ 70,000 per year-a median salary when compared to the men who were also full professors in the Department of Sociology, Social Work, and Criminal Justice.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

But Spencer's lawsuit proposes comparing her pay to that of two former University administrators, Drs. Michael Shackleford and Cortez Dial, who each earned over $ 100,000 per year as professors in other departments.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Though Spencer establishes a pay disparity, she fails to present evidence that creates a genuine issue of material fact that Shackleford and Dial are appropriate comparators.

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: assumed; claim: (a), (k)

Assuming without deciding that Luceus has established a prima facie case of disparate treatment, it is nonetheless clear that she " 'has not mustered enough evidence for a reasonable jury to conclude that [the defendants'] stated reason' " for failing to promote her "was pretextual."

Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: conceded; claim: (a), (k)

Figueroa first became eligible for promotion to the FS-01 pay grade in 2000, and he applied every year until his retirement in 2009.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

He made it to the lower end of the ranked finalist lists in 2004 and 2005, but he again was deemed mid-ranked from 2006 to 2009.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Indeed, the government conceded the prima facie case for the purpose of the motion.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: conceded; claim: (a), (m)

On May 1, 2013, Mawakana received notice that he had been denied tenure and that his employment was to terminate effective August 15, 2013.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: conceded; claim: (a)

Either job would be a promotion for Mayorga.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

The AOC ultimately chose Ed Williams and John Coulter, two white males it claimed were most qualified, to fill the two positions.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: conceded; claim: (a)(1); party: plaintiff Melvin Hicks, shift commander (respondent); subject: party=plaintiff Melvin Hicks, shift commander (respondent)

He was later demoted from shift commander to correctional officer for his failure to ensure that his subordinates entered their use of a St. Mary’s vehicle into the official logbook on March 19, 1984.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Finally, on June 7, 1984, he was discharged for threatening Powell during an exchange of heated words on April 19.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

basis: conceded; claim: (a)(1),(k),(l),(h),(j); party: plaintiff 17 white firefighters and 1 Hispanic firefighter who passed the examinations (petitioners); count: (a)(1) disparate-treatment claim for the refusal to certify the examination results; subject: party=plaintiff 17 white firefighters and 1 Hispanic firefighter who passed the examinations (petitioners); count=(a)(1) disparate-treatment claim for the refusal to certify the examination results

The plaintiffs — who are the petitioners here — are 17 white firefighters and 1 Hispanic firefighter who passed the examinations but were denied a chance at promotions when the CSB refused to certify the test results.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

The results would determine which firefighters would be considered for promotions during the next two years, and the order in which they would be considered.

Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)