COURT RULES EEOC SUIT CAN PROCEED TO TRIAL AGAINST SKYWEST AIRLINES

Jun 29, 2009 (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Documents and Publications/ContentWorks via COMTEX) -- SKYW | Quote | Chart | News | PowerRating -- CHICAGO - U.S. District Court Judge Wayne R. Andersen of the Northern District of Illinois has rejected a motion by SkyWest Airlines, Inc. to dismiss a sexual harassment lawsuit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), thus allowing the case to proceed to trial before a federal court jury, the EEOC announced today.

Judge Anderson ruled that a series of sexually offensive comments made to three women employed by SkyWest Airlines, Inc., as alleged by the EEOC in its suit, could constitute actionable sexual harassment. In denying defendant SkyWest's motion for summary judgment, the court said that a reasonable jury "could find [the] comments to be 'uninvited sexual solicitations' and 'obscene language' rather than merely vulgar banter."

In its lawsuit (EEOC v. SkyWest Airlines, Inc., N.D. Ill. No 07 C 4925), the EEOC alleges that SkyWest discriminated against three former employees by subjecting them to sexual harassment by a co-worker and then firing them in retaliation for complaining about the hostile workplace, all in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

On April 3, 2009, SkyWest filed a motion arguing that it was entitled to a judgment in its favor without a trial because, the airline argued, the comments were not "severe" or "pervasive" as required by federal case precedents.

In resolving the motion against SkyWest, Judge Anderson adopted the analysis previously articulated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago. "The Seventh Circuit has explained the difference between actionable and non-actionable sexual harassment," the judge wrote. "'On the one side lie sexual assaults, other physical contact, whether amorous or hostile, for which there is no consent express or implied; uninvited sexual solicitations; intimidating words or acts; obscene language or gestures, pornographic pictures. On the other side lies the occasional vulgar banter, tinged with sexual innuendo, of coarse or boorish workers.'"

The court noted that between six and eight offensive remarks were made to each of the women and included the speaker's statements, "that he wished he could put his mouth on her breasts" and "that he wanted to have sex with her and get between her thighs." The court concluded, "We find that a reasonable fact finder could find that these comments to be severe enough to constitute 'uninvited sexual solicitations' and 'obscene language,' rather than merely vulgar banter." (Memorandum Opinion and Order, No. 07 C 4925, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Div., J. Andersen, entered 06/25/2009.)

EEOC Regional Attorney John Hendrickson of the Chicago District Office, said, "From time to time we see cases in which, in our judgment at least, courts appear unrealistic about how much sexual misconduct women workers are required to endure on the job and are reluctant to apply the Supreme Court's and the Seventh Circuit's analysis of what is actionable and what is not. This is not one of those cases. We think that in this case the court got it right, and we're glad that the road has now been cleared for a full trial on the merits."

The EEOC litigation team is being led by Supervisory Trial Attorney Diane I. Smason and Trial Attorney June Wallace Calhoun of the Chicago District Office.

The EEOC enforces federal laws prohibiting discrimination in employment. Further information about the Commission is available on its web site at www.eeoc.gov.

The EEOC Chicago District Office is responsible for processing charges of discrimination, administrative enforcement, and the conduct of agency litigation in Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and North and South Dakota, with Area Offices in Milwaukee and Minneapolis.

More News:   Market Updates | Stock Alerts | All Trading News | Stock Index