APPEALS COURT REVERSES DECISION THAT BOEING'S MESA PLANT DID NOT ENGAGE IN SEX HARASSMENT

Ninth Circuit Returns  EEOC Lawsuit to Lower Court  for Trial in Arizona

PHOENIX – The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission  (EEOC) today announced that the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth  Circuit reversed a decision by a lower court which had concluded that The Boeing  Company did not engage in unlawful sexual harassment or retaliation at its  plant in Mesa, Ariz.  The court of appeals returned the case to Arizona for trial.

In the lawsuit  (EEOC v. The Boeing Company, CV-03-1210-PHX-PGR),  the EEOC seeks relief on behalf of Kelley Miles, a female mechanic who works on  the Apache helicopter that Boeing manufactures for the U.S. Army. Miles works  at Boeing’s facility in Mesa.

In the  appellate decision (EEOC v. The Boeing  Company, No. 05-17386, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, July 31, 2008), the  court of appeals reversed the district court’s decision because it concluded  that there exist triable issues of fact as to whether Miles was subjected to a  hostile work environment based on her sex, whether Boeing adequately responded  to her complaints, and whether Boeing retaliated against Miles for complaining  of the harassment.

The court of appeals concluded that,  based on the evidence, a reasonable jury could infer that Miles was subject to  sexual harassment by her co-workers. According  to the court, “Miles and others testified that, from 1998 to 2001, Miles was  the target of offensive and sexual language, as well as physical advances by a  male co-worker, and that male co-workers interfered with various aspects of her  work.”

The court of appeals also  concluded that the EEOC raised triable issues of fact as to whether Boeing  adequately responded to Miles’ complaints of harassment. The court noted that, although Boeing  terminated one offending male employee and disciplined another, “a reasonable  jury could find that these two employees were part of a much larger problem  with respect to Miles’ treatment.” According  to the court, there was evidence that the employee who was eventually  terminated had been transferred into Miles’s department because he had  repeatedly harassed other female employees.  The court added that evidence also existed showing that the harassment  continued even after Boeing took its initial measures, and the company knew or  should have known that the problems were continuing.

Finally, the court of appeals  concluded that there existed triable issues of fact on the EEOC’s retaliation  claim because events occurring after Miles complained of the harassment could  cause a reasonable jury to conclude that Miles was subject to an ongoing  hostile work environment, and that Boeing knew or should have known about it.

The case  has been remanded to a United States District Judge in Arizona for trial.

“The EEOC  is gratified by the decision of the Ninth Circuit on appeal,” said Regional  Attorney Mary Jo O’Neill of the Phoenix District Office. “We are very appreciative of the great work  done by our Appellate Services Division in Washington, particularly appellate attorney  Jim Tucker. We look forward to  presenting the details of Ms. Miles’ treatment at trial.”

EEOC Phoenix District Director  Chester Bailey added, “Studies have shown that female employees are often subjected  to harassment when they work in non-traditional settings. Such harassment often  has the effect of driving female employees out of non- traditional workplaces,  which generally offer higher wages than those offered to women performing  traditionally female jobs.”

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