The Case Robertson Verses Hunter Panels LLC And Carlisle Construction Materials Inc.

766 Words 4 Pages
The case Robertson verses Hunter Panels LLC and Carlisle Construction Materials Inc., was a civil rights – Title VII Employment – Retaliation, workplace Harassment, Gender Discrimination suit. Sandra Robertson had worked for Hunter Panels LLC since 2006. Robertson filed a lawsuit against Hunter Panels LLC and Carlisle Construction Materials Inc. in April 2013, for harassment on the job, and gender discrimination. Mrs. Robertson was fired in 2012, after telling a human resource employee that gender discrimination was a on going problem at Hunter Panels LLC (Packel, 2016). Mrs. Robertson a twenty-year veteran of the Untied States Air Force, the discrimination started after she was hired at Hunter Panels LLC. Robertson was openly embarrassed …show more content…
Robertson said she worked in this position for six years never reaching what her predecessor made and he only worked in the position for 6 months. However, when Robertson was promoted to supervisor her new position the harassment increased the company ignored her reports about he harassment. Her supervisor said she was throwing fits. The human resource manager treated her unfairly and demoralized her (Packel, 2016).
In December 2011, she received a very good performance evaluation, then in April 2012, she was fired, supposedly because she was not doing her job. Sandra Robertson did her job well, and there were employees that did not like taking orders from a strong assertive women and mistreated her on a daily basis (Packel, 2016).
The court found Hunter and Carlisle guilty for gender discrimination against Robertson, the company exposed her to a hostile work environment because of her gender, and by doing this it was unlawfully retaliation against her when the company terminated her employment. The jurors stated, Robertson had emotional pain, metal anguish, suffering and other non-pecuniary loss, all form how she was treated by Hunter and Carlisle The jurors determined that Robertson would received $12.5million, in punitive damages, her federal and state protected rights were violated, Hunter and Carlisle acted with malice and/or indifferences (Verdict Search,
…show more content…
This would protect all employees regardless of how small the business. Most states have civil rights laws that replicate the federal laws a like, these laws do not replace each other. To be sure what the law requires and what a small business employment responsibilities are, all appropriate laws, in each state should be checked individually (Farber, 2010).
Race or color should never be a reason a person could or couldn’t do a job. Race could never be a BFOQ. Although, the First Amendment would over rule Title VII in creative works where race of the worker is essential to the creative purpose. The BFOQ should stay in place, because not everyone is qualified for ever job that is out there.
Discrimination against gender and on the job harassment is never something a company should ever do to an employee that is on their payroll. Discriminating against a female employee that does the same job as a male employee where pay rate is concern is not a good idea. Female and male employee can be equal when it comes to wages. Terminating an employee for unlawful reasons is one thing, but termination an employee for doing their job is another. In the case of Sandra Robertson, she did her job and did it well. The other male employee thought she did not deserve the position she had so they harassed her because she was female and didn’t think they had to follow orders from a female supervisor. Management took

Related Documents