Case Law Vigil v. Salt Lake City Corp.

Vigil v. Salt Lake City Corp.

Document Cited Authorities (14) Cited in Related

Daphne A. Oberg, Magistrate Judge

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING [51] DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING [52] PLAINTIFF'S PARTIAL MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

David Barlow, United States District Judge

Before the court are Plaintiff Monica Vigil's and Defendant Salt Lake City Corporation's cross-motions for summary judgment.[1]Plaintiff's complaint alleges three causes of action: retaliation in violation of Title VII, a violation of the Equal Protection Clause under § 1983 and breach of contract.[2] Plaintiff now stipulates to the dismissal of her remaining breach of contract claim,[3]and both parties move for summary judgment on the two remaining causes of action. For the reasons that follow, the court denies both motions.

BACKGROUND

At all relevant times, Salt Lake City Corporation operated a golf division under its Department of Public Services.[4] The golf division hired “Golf Relation Specialists” to receive customers, manage the tee sheet, and ring up retail items and green fees.[5]Golf Relation Specialists who were designated as “teaching professionals” could also teach clinics or private lessons.[6]It was a part-time or seasonal at-will employment position.[7] The course's Head Golf Professional supervised the position.[8]

Defendant hired Plaintiff as a “Golf Relations Specialist” for the Nibley Golf Course (“Nibley”) in March 2011.[9]She was hired by Jeremy Green Plaintiff's “very close friend,” who knew Plaintiff from her time working at the Mountain Dell Golf Course cafe.[10]Mr. Green was the Head Golf Professional at Nibley.[11]Because Plaintiff's job as a Golf Relations Specialist was seasonal, she would begin work once the weather permitted the golf course to open each spring usually around March, and then she would work through December.[12]According to Plaintiff, she was the longest tenured employee, so she “had seniority as far as the hours went.”[13]

October 18, 2017 Sexual Harassment Complaint

Around 2017, Plaintiff began teaching clinics[14] as well as private lessons.[15]That summer, Mr. Green left Nibley to work at Mountain Dell Golf Course.[16]Mike Brimley became the Head Golf Professional at Nibley.[17]Stacey Camacho was his Assistant Golf Professional.[18]

That October, Plaintiff complained about Mr. Camacho's management style to Liz Nenni,[19]Defendant's Human Resources representative assigned to the golf division.[20]A day later Plaintiff accused Mr. Camacho of sexual harassment (October 18, 2017 Complaint”).[21] Defendant hired an outside investigator to handle the matter.[22]The investigator concluded that Plaintiff's allegations were “serious and significant” but “at best, the investigation uncovered a she-said/he-said situation, where no other coworkers can substantiate any of the allegations and [Mr.] Camacho denies all sexual harassment.”[23]Darlene Harper, Senior Human Resources Consultant for Defendant, informed Plaintiff of the outcome of the investigation on January 22, 2018.[24]Around the same time, Steve Elliot became the Head Golf Professional at Nibley.[25]

February 12, 2018 EEO Complaint

On February 12, 2018, Plaintiff emailed Ms. Harper, stating “I've been informed that I need to keep track of and report every act or non-action that I believe is retaliation, harassment, hostile working environment and age or sexual discrimination that continues at Nibley” (February 12, 2018 Complaint”).[26]She stated that on February 4, Myles Borich, a cart range employee, brought a beer into the pro shop and told Plaintiff that he would put it in the fridge for her.[27]Plaintiff told him to take it out of the shop, and Mr. Borich complied.[28]Plaintiff also alleged that on February 8, Brady Hansgren was changing his clothes after his shift and he dressed in front of Plaintiff-pulling up his pants, tucking in his underwear, zipping his zipper, and putting on his belt.[29]Plaintiff also asserted that, later that day, Ronnie Nereen asked Plaintiff if she thought there was anything illegal going on in the parking lot because Mr. Borich's friends were there and they did not appear to be golfers.[30]When Plaintiff asked Mr. Nereen what he meant, he stated, [t]his is not a drug place and he d[id] not want that type of behavior occurring around the golf course.”[31]Plaintiff believed this conduct to be retaliation for her sexual harassment complaint.[32]

Defendant investigated Plaintiff's complaint as an allegation of [r]etaliation” through its Equal Employment Opportunity (“EEO”) program.[33]In investigating Plaintiff's complaints, Melissa Green, EEO Program Manager, interviewed Mr. Borich. Mr. Borich said he “found an unopened beer can in a golf cart and offered it to [Plaintiff] because he knows she occasionally drinks beer when not working and he thought it was a ‘nice gesture.'[34]Mr. Hansgren denied changing in front of Plaintiff.[35]The EEO referred Plaintiff's complaint about Mr. Borich's potential drug activity to the Public Services Administration because it did not “implicate e [sic] a potential violation of the City's Anti-Discrimination and Harassment Policy.”[36]

Ms. Green concluded that none of Plaintiff's allegations were supported.[37]Her report was sent to Lisa Shaffer, Defendant's Public Services Department Director, on May 30, 2018.[38]

April 6, 2018 Complaint

On April 6, Plaintiff reported that she was receiving less hours than her coworkers and when she requested more hours from Mr Elliot, he told her she was not wanted in the pro shop” (“April 6, 2018 Complaint”).[39]She reported that her coworkers, on numerous occasions, would ignore her, walk away, or give her a minimal reply when she greeted them.[40]She also reported that, a year previously, Mr. Green had told her he would increase her pay by an additional $1.00 an hour but she did not receive the increase.[41]Plaintiff “alleged other possible policy violations, including drug use by coworkers, inappropriate lesson assignments, failing to list her as an instructor on the website, and smoking in the cart barn.”[42]Plaintiff believed this conduct to be retaliation for her sexual harassment complaint.[43]

During her investigation of Plaintiff's retaliation complaint, Ms. Green conducted interviews with Mr. Elliot, Mr. Hansgren, Mr. Borich, Mr. Bowcut, Mr. Green, and Plaintiff.[44]Mr. Bowcut, who was responsible for creating the schedule, said that “his goal is to ensure that shift distribution is even” and that the three Golf Relations Specialists each “receive three pro shop shifts.”[45]Mr. Bowcut reported that Plaintiff was the “first person he contacts when he needs additional coverage,” and that he had offered her two additional shifts on separate occasions in April, both of which she declined.[46]Mr. Bowcut “acknowledged addressing a few performance issues with [Plaintiff], which he feels she may perceive as him ‘singling her out.'[47]But he denied intentionally ignoring Plaintiff and said that he had been “talkative” with her.[48]

Mr. Hansgren described himself as having been Plaintiff's friend at one point, but beginning in 2016, he began to believe she was making false statements about employees.[49]Although he did not go out of his way to talk with her after 2016, he was always “friendly, respectful, and kind.”[50]He ultimately relocated to another golf course after Plaintiff made allegations about him bringing beer into the shop.[51]

Mr. Elliot indicated that Plaintiff's hours had not been reduced, but that there was a chance that poor weather occurred more frequently during her assigned pro shop shifts.[52]He denied telling Plaintiff that she was not welcome in the pro shop and that, “to the contrary, . . . told her he expects her to work in the pro shop” and “would assist her in trying to find a good balance between pro shop hours and teaching hours.”[53]Mr. Elliot said that he had not observed Mr. Bowcut, Mr. Borich, or Mr. Hansgren ignoring Plaintiff or treating her negatively.[54]He noted that he recently observed Mr. Bowcut, Mr. Hansgren, and Plaintiff eating a pizza together and “getting along.”[55]Mr. Elliot said Plaintiff was earning the same hourly wage as the other Golf Relations Specialists, and Mr. Green recalled having a conversation with Plaintiff about her pay rate, and that they discussed the possibility of Plaintiff working regularly in the pro shop instead of teaching for a $1.00 per hour raise.[56]However, Plaintiff ultimately decided to remain an instructor, according to Mr. Green.[57]

Ms. Green concluded that none of Plaintiff's allegations were supported.[58]Her report was sent to Ms. Shaffer on May 30, 2018.[59] May 11, 2018 Complaint

On May 11, Plaintiff made a complaint against Quentin Sasser another Golf Relations Specialist (“May 11, 2018 Complaint”).[60] She alleged that, on June 15, 2016-two years prior- Mr. Sasser engaged in sexually offensive behavior and that Mr. Green improperly handled her subsequent complaint to him about Mr. Sasser's behavior.[61]Ms. Harper investigated the complaint, interviewing Plaintiff, Mr. Sasser, Mr. Green, and two witnesses. Mr. Sasser “admitted that, as a joke and in a ‘playing motion,' he picked [Plaintiff] up.”[62]He “recall[ed] [Plaintiff] told him she was embarrassed by being picked up and Sasser subsequently apologized to her and stated he ‘didn't mean to embarrass [her].'[63]He “denied touching [Plaintiff]'s breasts and indicated she did not scream or kick when he picked her up.”[64] Mr. Green “acknowledged [Plaintiff] notified him of the incident and said she was ‘very embarrassed about it,'...

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex