New Jersey Employment Law Blog

Today brings news of two developments featuring coaches of women's sports teams.  The first comes from California.  USA Today reports that the former coach of the Fresno State women's basketball team  has won a jury verdict of more than $19 million.  She claims that she was fired for promoting women's issues.  The university, her former employer takes a different view, claiming inappropriate conduct on the job and obtaining a prescription pain-killer from one of her players.

Local reports from the Newark Star-Ledger bring news of the criminal conviction of a former Immaculata High School girls basketball coach as a result of having what apparently was a "consensual" sexual relationship with a player.  Patricia Balogh was convicted on four of five counts, although she avoided the most serious, which charged aggravated first degree sexual assault.  A conviction on that charge could have landed her in prison for 40 years.  As it is, she's looking at 10.  There's no word whether the victim's family plans to pursue an action for civil relief against the coach or the school.

Educational employers must be vigilant.  Inappropriate relationships between players and coaches are not common, but neither are they rare.  When they occur they have the potential to cause significant liabilities and, just as important, reputational damage. 

Posted In Employment Law News , Gender Discrimination & Sexual Harassment , Sexual Harassment | Comments (0) | Permalink |

This is our second post in a row that examines a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit --- this time arising out of a case from Iowa --- involving explicitly sexual conduct in the workplace. The case is Tenge v. Phillips Modern Ag Co,, decided April 28, 2006. It presents a somewhat unusual claim by the "other woman" that her boss and object of her desires violated her rights by firing her when his wife objected to her continued employment.

The plaintiff Maelynn Tenge started with the defendant Phillips Modern Ag Co., as a clerical employee. Over the years she worked her way up to a position of responsibility and became a key employee. Scott Phillips was the President of the company, and his wife Lori Phillips worked there, too.

There was no evidence that Tenge and Scott Phillips were having an affair. However, there was plenty of evidence of mutual attraction, including consensual touching. And Tenge admitted to authoring a series of explicit love notes to Scott and leaving them where they could be read by others. When Lori found out, her reaction was predictable. She told Scott to choose between her and the kids on the one hand, or Tenge on the other. Scott chose his family and Tenge was fired.

Tenge sued for gender discrimination in violation of Title VII. Affirming the trial court, the 8th Circuit rejected her contention that she was fired because of her sex. The court held that defendants' decision to fire her

does not amount to discrimination on the basis of the employee's status as a man or a woman; rather, it is based on the employee's own actions and therefore is permissible under Title VII. The ultimate basis for Tenge's dismissal was not her sex, it was Scott's desire to allay his wife's concerns over Tenge's admitted sexual behavior with him.

The court was careful to distinguish this case from quid pro quo sexual harassment, where the supervisor's conduct is not welcomed, and from situations where there is demonstrated widespread favoritism for one gender or the other.

Posted In Gender Discrimination & Sexual Harassment , Title VII | Comments (0) | Permalink |

What do you get when you cross a peeping tom manager with a persistent rash? If you're Jill Cottrill and Mary Combs, you get thrown unceremoniously out of court, that's what.

Unfortunately, Cottrill and Combs had to sue in federal court in Missouri. It's unlikely that they would have fared so poorly if they had sued in New Jersey, but their story is instructive nonetheless.

The case is Cottrill v. MFA, Inc. It was decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit on April 7, 2006. Over a blunt and well-reasoned dissent, the court upheld the trial court's entry of summary judgment in favor of the defendant employer.

Jill Cottrill was employed by MFA as a bookkeeper and Mary Combs as a part-time bookkeeper. They were supervised by Scott Adkins, the manager of MFA's retail facility in Albany, Missouri. The facility had one women's restroom, which adjoined a room that Adkins used as his personal "breakroom." Adkins remodeled the restroom in 1997 and added some non-standard equipment to enable him to view Cottrill while she used the restroom: a two-way mirror and a peephole that went through restroom wall into his breakroom. On the breakroom side Adkins hid the peephole with a bookself and paneling.

When Adkins saw Cottrill go to the restroom, he would retire to the breakroom to spy on her. This happened about two to three times per day over a period of four years, from 1997 to 2001. Adkins's deceptions worked: Cottrill never realized that she was being observed.

From about 2000 to 2002 Cottrill also noticed a sticky substance on the toilet seat a number of times. She suffered rashes on her legs, buttocks, ankles, chest and arms. Initially baffled by what was causing the rashes, she came to believe that they were caused by the sticky substance.

Posted In Gender Discrimination & Sexual Harassment , Title VII | Comments (0) | Permalink |