The Top 5 “Scariest” Workplaces in 2024
Oct 25, 2024
Without a doubt, companies around the country violate our employment laws every day in ways big and small. For many employees who have been treated illegally by their employers, filing a lawsuit and turning the issue into a “federal case” is not realistic for lots of reasons. In many other situations, however, employees whose rights have been violated not only sue their employers, but obtain jury verdicts that hold employers accountable, making workplaces safer for all of us. As we approach Halloween, here is a list of my top 5 “scariest” workplaces in 2024 as reflected in jury verdicts that were entered or affirmed (so far) this year.
1. Bloomsburg University – Retaliation Against Sexual Harassment Reporter
How often do we find ourselves repeating the phrase “No good deed goes unpunished?” Jeffrey Krug, a former dean of the business school at Bloomsburg University, must have been thinking that when the university fired him after he helped an administrative assistant file a sexual harassment complaint against the University’s president. In his lawsuit, Mr. Krug alleged that he understood university policy to require him to report accusations of harassment that had come to his attention to the school’s Title IX coordinator. In the wake of the report, according to the lawsuit, the president and provost retaliated against Mr. Krug by initiating an investigation into his actions, including an alleged breach of confidential personnel matters when he consulted with his father about how to handle the sexual harassment report he had received. A Pennsylvania jury awarded $3.9 million to Mr. Krug in August 2024, letting all employers who consider retaliating against the bystanders who report sexual harassment know they are doing so at their own peril.
2. United Parcels Service – Race Discrimination
In a lawsuit filed in federal district court in the state of Washington, Tahvio Gratton, who is Black, alleged that his immediate supervisor, who is white, repeatedly called him “boy” in the context of telling him to “move faster.” When Mr. Gratton asked his immediate supervisor to stop calling him “boy,” the supervisor allegedly told him that he was “from the South” and that’s how he talked. After the name calling continued, Mr. Gratton complained to another manager, who similarly dismissed the concern by saying that was “just how he talks.” Mr. Gratton also alleged that he was treated differently than white employees and suffered retaliation when he helped other Black employees file grievances over their mistreatment. According to the lawsuit, UPS managers fired Mr. Gratton based on false allegations that he had sexually harassed a female supervisor when he touched her back to steady himself when he tripped on a loading dock. In early October, the jury let UPS know exactly what they thought of its treatment of Mr. Gratton, returning a verdict in his favor for $238 million.
3. Penn State University / Medical Center – Retaliation for Standing Up for Safety of Athletes
In this retaliation case, Dr. Scott Lynch, a former doctor for the Penn State football team, alleged that he was fired for reporting that the head coach pressured him to push student-athletes back onto the field before they were ready. In a verdict that included $250,000 for lost wages and $5 million in punitive damages, the jury in this case found that Dr. Lynch had been removed from his job for refusing to comply with the coach’s attempt to influence or interfere with his medical autonomy. The fact that Dr. Lynch stood up to pressure from a coach to compromise the health of Penn State’s student athletes will go a long way to protecting others from unsafe practices.
4. Wal-Mart – Failure to Accommodate a Disability
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has been the law of the land for almost thirty-five years, yet I am reminded that we continue to live in an “ableist” society every time I see a case like this one. This summer, the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed a verdict finding that Wal-Mart had violated the ADA by refusing to provide a workplace accommodation in the form of a scheduling adjustment that would have prevented the termination of Marlo Spaeth, who has Down syndrome, after 15 years of positive employment one of its Supercenters in Wisconsin. Ms. Spaeth worked in the domestics department for four hours a day up to four days a week, and her schedule allowed her to catch the bus since she did not drive. When Wal-Mart changed its scheduling systems and refused to allow Ms. Spaeth to continue working her prior noon to four afternoon shift, she was confused and often left “early” to catch her bus. Even after family members advocated for a return to Ms. Spaeth’s prior schedule because she was unable to adapt to the change for several reasons, Wal-Mart managers refused and terminated her employment for poor attendance. Through the trial in the case, Wal-Mart claimed that it never considered the requests for Ms. Spaeth to return to her prior schedule to be requests for reasonable accommodation, suggesting that many employees had complained about scheduling changes. In returning a verdict for $125 million against Wal-Mart, the jury clearly rejected the company’s defense. However, due to caps on the damages available to plaintiffs in these cases, the court reduced the award down to $300,000.
If you think application of the damages cap in this case (any many others) means that Wal-Mart won’t care the next time it denies a simple accommodation to a hard-working disabled employee with a positive performance record, you are probably right. If you want to do something about the damages cap that led to this result, check out the advocacy work the National Employment Lawyers Association is doing to end it: https://www.enddamagecapsforworkers.com.
5. Wake County, NC – Retaliation for Speaking Up About Discriminatory Speech
According to a lawsuit filed by Steven Williamson and Alvin Speight, two sheriff’s deputies in Wake County, North Carolina, were fired in retaliation for reporting the use of homophobic and other discriminatory comments by a lieutenant, Teddy Patrick, during a training session to the then-sheriff. The lieutenant, who is Black, was accused of saying he “didn’t believe in being gay,” that he did not like “gay people,” that he was uneasy boarding planes with Muslims, and if “white people keep killing themselves,” then Black people “would be the majority instead of the minority.” According to the lawsuit, after an internal investigation into the deputies’ reports, the sheriff demoted the lieutenant and removed his supervisory duties. However, as alleged in the case, after Gerald Baker was elected as the new sheriff, he promoted Patrick, with whom he had been close friends for years, to his second in command. A few weeks later, Sheriff Baker fired Williams and Speight without identifying a reason. This year, a jury awarded $500,000 to each of the deputies, finding that their terminations were motivated by retaliation for speaking up about discrimination.
As we head into the holiday season in the United States, we can be grateful for the plaintiffs, lawyers, judges, and juries who are willing to confront these scary workplaces and protect us all from this type of blatant discrimination and retaliation.
If you believe you have faced mistreatment at work and are considering your next steps, the experienced employment law attorneys at Uebler Law LLC can guide you through your options. Contact us here.
