Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co.

US District Court for the District of Minnesota -

824 F. Supp. 847 (D. Minn. 1993) May 14, 1993

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

KYLE, District Judge.

... The Plaintiff Class (hereinafter, "Plaintiffs") allege that Eveleth Mines has engaged in a pattern of discriminatory practices, including discrimination in hiring, and in terms and conditions of employment such as job assignment, promotion, compensation, discipline and training. Plaintiffs also allege sexual discrimination based upon sexual harassment the existence of a work environment that is hostile to women...

Eveleth Mines and the Union deny the Plaintiffs' claims and state that hiring practices at Eveleth Mines, as well as the terms and conditions of employment, are conducted in a non-discriminatory manner. Eveleth Mines further alleges that it has had a practice of immediately investigating and correcting sexual harassment when it knows or reasonably should know of its existence, and that it has adhered to that practice at all relevant times...

Claims of Sex Discrimination The focus of Plaintiffs' claim of sex discrimination in Eveleth Mines' promotional practices is the promotion of hourly employees to "step-up foreman" and "foreman." Step-up foremen are hourly employees who are given supervisory responsibility over a crew for temporary periods of time... No woman has ever been promoted to step-up foreman at Eveleth Mines... The presence of a "0" looms large and indicates that Eveleth Mines' promotion practices have at least a disparate impact on women...

However, in spite of the zero, Eveleth Mines sought to prove that its failure to promote women to step-up foreman was not caused by either an employment policy or discriminatory intent; rather, the disparity is caused by unrelated factors, specifically that few women had the training or experience necessary to be considered for step-up foreman and those that did either were not interested in the position,or were not "right" for it. These proffered explanations are insufficient to rebut Plaintiffs' evidence of discrimination... Further, disparate impact theory does not require proof of motive; rather, it only requires that a facially neutral practice be shown to have a disparate impact on women...

The Court concludes that Plaintiffs have established that Eveleth Mines' practiceof promotions to step-up foreman, which is based upon subjective and ambiguous selection criteria has a disparate impact on women. The Court further concludes that Eveleth Mines' use of subjective and ambiguous criteria for making promotions to step-up foreman, when combined with Eveleth Mines' knowledge that women were underrepresented in step-up positions, constitutes proof of discriminatory intent sufficient to support a conclusion that Plaintiffs have proven discriminatory intent beyond a preponderance of the evidence... Plaintiffs, therefore, have also established disparate treatment in promotions to step-up foreman...

Claims of Sexual Harassment ...42 U.S.C. 2000e-2(a) (1). Harassment on the basis of sex is undeniably a form of sex discrimination.

Plaintiffs claim that they have been subject to sexual harassment through the maintenance of a hostile environment at the Thunderbird Mine and Fairlane Plant. By maintaining their sexual harassment claims as a class action, Plaintiffs seek to expand sexual harassment discrimination to a new arena; to the Court's knowledge, no class of plaintiffs has ever maintained through trial a claim of sexual harassment...

Eveleth Mines, including the Thunderbird Mine and Fairlane Plant, is a male-dominated environment. Men alone were employed as hourly employees for the first ten years Eveleth Mines operated; women began to work there in 1975. Men occupy every supervisory and managerial position in the Operations area, whereas women occupy mostly lower level job classifications. As a result, relationships of authority and power always disfavor women... In addition to being male-dominated in terms of power and position, Eveleth Mines is male-dominated in terms of the sexualized nature of the work place. Men initiate and promulgate almost all references to sex and to women as sexual objects. In addition, male-focused references to sex and to women as sexual objects have persisted throughout the time that women have worked at Eveleth Mines, including all periods relevant to this action.

There was testimony that during the class period, visual references to sex and to women as sexual objects were found throughout Eveleth Mines, particularly the Fairlane Plant and including areas where women worked, ate, and attended to their personal needs while at work. These visual references took the primary forms of graffiti, photos, and cartoons. ... In addition to visual materials, Eveleth Mines' work environment was characterized by verbal statements and language reflecting a sexualized, male-oriented, and anti-female atmosphere. Language at Eveleth Mines was generally coarse; both men and women cursed and used words with a sexual referent. Strikingly, however, only men went further and used language either (1) referring to women generally in terms of their body parts, and/or (2) directing comments to or about specific women and their sex lives, including proposing sexual relationships and discussing sexual exploits. Related to this second variety of language was the use of "pet names" and terms that persons in romantic relationships might use, e.g., "honey" or "babe."... Finally, some women at Eveleth Mines were subjected to physical acts that reflected a sexual motive or concern on the part of the perpetrator. These incidents ranged from a male pretending to perform oral sex on a sleeping woman co-worker to a man touching a woman in an objectionable manner, to women being presented with various dildos, one of which was named "Big Red."

... The evidence in this case warrants a conclusion that Plaintiffs have shown by a preponderance of the evidence that the acts of sexual harassment detailed above were unwelcome.

"[S]exual behavior directed at [women] raises the inference that the harassment is based upon her sex." McGregor I, 955 F.2d at 564. As discussed supra, the record contains sufficient instances of sexual behavior directed at women, both during the class period and before, to warrant a finding that the harassment, because of its sexual nature, was based upon women's sex.

... To affect a "term, condition, or privilege" of employment of employment within the meaning of Title VII and MHRA, the harassment must be "sufficiently severe or pervasive to `alter the conditions of [the victim's] employment and create an abusive working environment.'" Meritor, 477 U.S. at 67, 106 S. Ct. at 2405 (quoting Henson, 682 F.2d at 904). ...

...[T]he Court finds that the effect, and possibly the intent, of the sexualized environment that existed at Eveleth Mines was to inform women that they were perceived primarily as sexual objects and inferior to men, rather than as co-workers, and that these perceptions were an integral part of working at Eveleth Mines.

...The Court finds that women at Eveleth Mines worked in an environment where women were viewed primarily in terms stereotypic of women qua women: sexual objects and inferior to men when it came to working at Eveleth Mines.

... Taking into account the totality of the circumstances and all relevant evidence, the Court concludes that a reasonable woman would find that the working environment at Eveleth Mines, both during the class period and before, altered the terms and conditions of her employment and was abusive.

... The final element of a claim of class-wide liability is whether the employer "knew or should have known of the harassment and failed to take proper remedial action... Sexual harassment at Eveleth Mines was so pervasive that an inference of knowledge arises... In addition, Eveleth Mines never established a system for either creating or processing records of complaints, although such records could have facilitated monitoring the work environment for its sexual hostility... Finally, Eveleth Mines made no effort to communicate with its male employees concerning "the nature and the need to show respect to female employees." Robinson, 760 F. Supp. at 1532.

.. both Title VII and MHRA require an employer to make a timely and appropriate action where it knows or should know that its employees are subject to acts of sexual harassment. In work places which have been traditionally male and where females constitute a small minority of the employees, employers may have an increased obligation to create environments which are safe for all employees... Accordingly, the Court concludes that based upon the circumstances existing both prior to and during the class period, Eveleth Mines failed to take prompt remedial action to alleviate the hostile environment...

In summary, Plaintiffs have established that Eveleth Mines engaged in a pattern or practice of maintaining an environment sexually hostile to women. Plaintiffs have further established that the practice of sexual harassment was a continuing one: it existed both prior to and during the class period. What, if any, individual damages resulted from this policy of sexual harassment is relevant only during the recovery phase of the proceedings and will be determined therein. Accordingly, the Court expresses no opinion on that issue.

...Accordingly, based upon the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiffs are entitled to an order for judgment against defendants on Plaintiffs' class-wide claims of (1) sex discrimination in promotions to step-up foreman and foreman, and (2) sexual harassment...

3. Plaintiffs shall be awarded appropriate injunctive relief;

4. Plaintiffs shall be awarded their reasonable costs and attorney's fees from defendants Eveleth Taconite Company, Eveleth Expansion Company, Oglebay Norton Company Oglebay Norton Taconite Company...

Once you have read the chapter readings, watched the lecture, read the Jenson case, and watched the movie North Country, if you are assigned to Group 1 (posting an original response) this week, please answer the following questions:

1. What were the plaintiffs' key legal claims? What were management's reactions to those claims? Cite to the case excerpt.

2. Why does sexual harassment continue to persist in business, given the risk of liability, as well as the personal and profession harm such behavior causes? In discussing risk, students must cite to the lecture and/or textbook.

3. Based on your viewing of the movie (not the case excerpt): You are the Director of Human Resources at Eveleth Mines in 2021. Identify and explain two actions you would implement to protect against workplace harassment