Marotta v. Ford Motor Co.

119 F.Supp.3d 676

Alanna MAROTTA, Plaintiff,

v.FORD MOTOR COMPANY, et. al, Defendants.

Case No. 14–CV–11149.

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division.

Signed Aug. 11, 2015.

Jeffrey S. Burg, Law Offices Jeffrey S. Burg, Esq., Bingham Farms, MI, for Plaintiff.

Elizabeth P. Hardy, Kienbaum Opperwall Hardy & Pelton, P.L.C., Birmingham, MI, Julia T. Baumhart, Kienbaum, Opperwall, Birmingham, MI, for Defendants.

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. # 34)

GEORGE CARAM STEEH, District Judge.

Plaintiff Alanna Marotta alleges that her employer Ford Motor Company and supervisors Michael Wendel, Michael Brudzinski and Thomas Garrity discriminated and retaliated against her, and sexually harassed her in the workplace. Plaintiff claims: Count I—Title VII Gender Discrimination; Count II—Title VII Gender Retaliation; Count III—Title VII Sexual Harassment; Count IV—Title VII Sexual Harassment Retaliation; Count V—ELCRA (Elliot–Larsen Civil Rights Act) Gender Discrimination; Count VI—ELCRA Sexual Harassment; Count VII—ELCRA Sexual Harassment Retaliation; Count VIII—ADA (Age Discrimination Act) Retaliation; and Count IX—PWDCRA (Persons With Disabilities Civil Rights Act) Retaliation.

Now before the court is defendants' motion for summary judgment on all claims (Doc. # 34). The court held oral argument on July 16, 2015. For the reasons that follow, the motion will be granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, the court will grant summary judgment to defendants on all claims except the Title VII and ELCRA sexual harassment claims. As to the ELCRA sexual harassment claim, however, defendant Brudinski is entitled to summary judgment.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Relevant Work History

Plaintiff Alanna Marotta is currently employed by defendant Ford but has been on medical leave since March 22, 2013.¹ (Pl's. Ex. 32). She has worked for Ford since 1999. Plaintiff began her employment with Ford in Chicago at Ford's parts distribution center. Since 2003, however, plaintiff has worked in the packaging department at Ford's Brownstown, Michigan complex. (Pl's. Dep. 71:10–22).

When she began with Ford in 1999, plaintiff was trained and certified as a hi-lo driver. She subsequently received additional hi-lo training at Brownstown in 2003 and 2009. (Pl's. Dep. 27:4–28:2).

Plaintiff's husband, Angelo Marotta, also worked at the Brownstown complex. Angelo was elected UAW plant chairman in 2005 and served in this position until he lost the chairmanship to Bob Stover in 2011. (Pl's. Dep. 10:1–25, 11:6–11; 15:6–16:7).

B. Plaintiff's Knee Injury and Work Restrictions/Ford's Alleged Violations

In 2004, plaintiff suffered a torn meniscus in her left knee while on the job. This required surgery and subsequent work restrictions: "limited walking to 2 hrs/day, stand 2 hrs/day, sit 4 hrs/day, sit-stand option while sitting; ... no stand up driving; ... sit-down hi-lo driving; minimal bending, stooping, kneeling or twisting of the left knee." (Pl's. Ex. 8–10).

Ford offers multiple job assignments for people with plaintiff's restrictions requiring a sit-stand option. These include: the "Jones" hand-pack machine, sub-kits, variable hand-pack work, and sit-down hi-lo driving. (Pl's. Ex. 10–11).

At the Brownstown complex, employees in the packaging department are often reassigned temporarily to other tasks or departments when there is no available work in the packaging department. (Defs.' Ex. 5, ¶ 13). Employees with the least seniority are reassigned first. (Id. ). Plaintiff alleges that two other employees, James Smith and Paul Bagwell, had similar medical restrictions as her but were treated more favorably because they were not moved to different assignments (like hi-lo driving) or were given more favorable assignments (namely, folding boxes). (Pl's. Dep. 341:23–343:3, 551:5–16; Pl's. Resp. 27).

Evidence proffered by defendants shows that James Smith was three-months senior to plaintiff. And Paul Bagwell worked in the sheet metal department, not the packaging department, and he did not share a common supervisor with plaintiff. (Defs.' Ex. 5, ¶¶ 8, 21). Moreover, Brownstown's human relations manager states that Bagwell is under different medical restrictions than Plaintiff. (Id. ¶ 21).

C. Allegations of Sexual Harassment and Retaliation

Plaintiff alleges that she was subjected to sexual harassment and retaliation in the course of her employment with Ford. At her deposition, she testified to specific instances of harassment by coworkers and supervisors.

1. Coworker Harassment

Plaintiff testified at her deposition that one of her supervisors, John Balsam, was confronted by another supervisor about allegations made by one of plaintiff's co-worker's that Balsam was sexually involved with plaintiff. (Pl's. Dep. 181:20–25). In addition, prior to 2010, supervisor Terry Sikes told plaintiff that a co-worker accused Sikes of giving plaintiff certain assignments in return for sexual favors. (Id. at 174:9–16). The same employee, Pat Fisher, also made "sexual comments and gestures" about plaintiff and commented on plaintiff's rear end and tight pants. (Id. at 179:2–180:6).

In August 2012, an anonymous letter entitled "People Against Alanna" circulated in the Brownstown complex, criticizing plaintiff for "strutting up and down the aisles" and for "sitting and socializing for 8–10 hours a day" "in her Sunday's best." (Id. at 214:17–19; Pl's. Ex. 5). The letter suggested that plaintiff was "still so bitter" about her husband losing his UAW Chairman position to Bob Stover. (Id. ). Plaintiff reported the letter to the Labor Relations Office, and labor relations representative Cathie Padilla recommended opening a formal investigation into the "juvenile" letter. (Defs.' Ex. 4, ¶ 3, Ex. B). As part of the investigation, plaintiff identified several female coworkers, including Pat Fisher, as "bullies"; Padilla concluded that while these employees "admitted to a certain level of joking around," their actions were more accurately categorized as "game playing and horsing around." (Id. ¶¶ 5–6, Ex. G.) Padilla reviewed Ford's "zero tolerance" policy with each of these employees. (Id. )

In December 2012, plaintiff discovered work materials at her station with "U b* * *h" written on them, which she reported to Labor Relations. (Id.; Pl's. Ex. 7).

2. UAW Chairman Bob Stover Harassment

With regard to current UAW Chairman Bob Stover, plaintiff alleges specific instances of conduct that occurred in the workplace on different occasions: (1) Stover grabbed her hand forcefully and placed it on his abdominal muscles over his shirt to see how "fit" he was, despite plaintiff's insistence that she did not want to touch his abs; (2) he "put his chest against [plaintiff's], put his face against [her] jaw line and yelled in [her] face as he clenched his fists" and said "I am not afraid of you" during a fight regarding overtime, in which plaintiff responded by calling Stover "a fucking little liar, a little fucker, a piece of shit"; and (3) he called plaintiff "a fucking bitch" because plaintiff told other employees about seeing Stover in a "compromising position" in a break area. (Pl's. Ex. 6). Plaintiff reported Stover's actions to Labor Relations representative Cathie Padilla in late August 2012. Padilla concluded that the incidents with Stover were stale and required no further action. (Defs.' Ex. 4, ¶¶ 5–6; Ex. G).

3. Supervisor Harassment

a. Greg DeAlexander

At her deposition, plaintiff testified that in 2006, supervisor Greg DeAlexander would act "very flirtatious," "com[e] up ... in [plaintiff's] face," and "try to have conversations ... on a personal level." (Pl's. Dep. 273:17–19). Plaintiff testified that it was going around the plant that DeAlexander was sexually involved with two woman at work, and she did not want him to pursue her. (Id. 273:23–274:5). Plaintiff says she ignored DeAlexander and his flirtatious behavior. (Id. 274:6–8). In response, DeAlexander allegedly "marked [plaintiff] AWOL when [she] was at work all day and wouldn't pay [her]. He said that [she] left early one day when [she] didn't." (Id. 274:8–11). Moreover, plaintiff testified:

He took me off my job that I was placed on that job by the physical therapist department and medical department, and management took me off that job; went and had my restrictions changed in medical that was given to me by an IME.

Then he had me mop floors and told me I no longer have a sit and stand. And then as soon as I was done, he would walk on ‘em and sarcastically make comments, oh, now you've gotta mop it again.

He was doing things like that to me.

(Id. 274:11–19).

b. Michael Wendel

Plaintiff also alleges sexual harassment by defendant Wendel. At her deposition, plaintiff testified that Wendel told plaintiff's co-workers that (1) he "had a hard-on all day" working with plaintiff; (2) he believed plaintiff's husband was unable to sexually satisfy her and that he "would love an opportunity because he knows he can"; and (3) he dreamt that he had sex with plaintiff and "it was so good [he] came back for seconds." (Id. 262:6–8, 296:6–11, 634:20–24). Additionally, plaintiff testified that Wendel made a comment directly to her that he "thought ... was funny" about plaintiff "just want[ing] to do" another employee. After seeing plaintiff hug that employee, Wendel sarcastically asked, "what about my hug[?]" (Id. 272:9–11, 282:1–6).

Plaintiff claims she reported Wendel's conduct in January 2013 to Crystal White–Philipo in Labor Relations. Moreover, plaintiff contends that she reported Wendel's conduct to Ford's hotline in March 2013. The report generated by Ford's hotline operator states that plaintiff reported "harassment." (Id. 286:1–288:25, 303:7–12; Pl's. Ex. 27–28; Defs.' Ex. 8).

c. Thomas Garrity

Plaintiff alleges that defendant Garrity (1) deliberately touched her backside on four-to-six occasions while leaning over plaintiff's workstation to review problems with parts on a computer screen; ...