What federal laws were violated according to the case

Assignment Help HR Management
Reference no: EM131030943

Laurie Chadwick v. WellPoint, Inc.

561 F.3d 38; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 6426 (U.S. Court of Appeals First Circuit)

Case  study:

The issue is whether Laurie Chadwick was overlooked for the promotion because she had small children.

Stahl, Circuit Judge.

Laurie Chadwick brought a claim of sex discrimination under Title VII against WellPoint, Inc. after she was denied a promotion. She alleged that her employer failed to promote her because of a sex-based stereotype that women who are mothers, particularly of young children, neglect their jobs in favor of their presumed childcare responsibilities.

Chadwick was a long-time employee of WellPoint, an insurance company, in its Maine office. She was hired by WellPoint in 1997, and was promoted in 1999 to the position of "Recovery Specialist II," which involved the pursuit of overpayment claims and claims for reimbursement from third parties. In 2006, encouraged by her supervisor, she applied for a promotion to a management position entitled "Recovery Specialist Lead" or "Team Lead." In this position, the successful candidate would be responsible for the recovery function for the region encompassing Maine, New Hampshire, and Connecticut. Because Chadwick was already performing several of the responsibilities of the Team Lead position and based on her supervisor's comments, Chadwick believed she was the frontrunner for the position. In addition, on her most recent performance evaluation in 2005, she had received excellent reviews, scoring a 4.40 out of a possible 5.00 points.

There were two finalists for the Team Lead position, Chadwick and another in-house candidate, Donna Ouelette. While Chadwick had held the Recovery Specialist II position for seven years, Ouelette had only been promoted to that position about a year earlier. In addition, Ouelette had scored lower than Chadwick, though satisfactorily, on her most recent performance review, receiving a 3.84 out of a possible 5.0 points.
Three managers interviewed the two finalists: Linda Brink, who had previously supervised and worked closely with Chadwick; Dawn Leno, the Director of Recovery; and Nanci Miller, Chadwick's immediate supervisor. Nanci Miller was the ultimate decisionmaker for the promotion but she considered input from Brink and Leno in reaching her decision. Based on her own perceptions and those of Brink and Leno, Miller graded Ouelette's interview performance higher than Chadwick's. Miller subsequently offered the promotion to Ouelette over Chadwick.

At the time of the promotion decision, Chadwick was the mother of an eleven-year-old son and six-year-old triplets in kindergarten. There is no allegation, insinuation, or for that matter evidence that Chadwick's work performance was negatively impacted by any childcare responsibilities she may have had. Indeed, Miller, the decisionmaker, did not know that Chadwick was the mother of young triplets until shortly before the promotion decision was made. Apparently, Chadwick's husband, the primary caretaker for the children, stayed home with them during the day while Chadwick worked. He also worked off-hour shifts, presumably nights and weekends, when Chadwick was at home with the children. During the same period, Chadwick was also taking one course a semester at the University of Southern Maine.

Chadwick alleges that WellPoint denied her the promotion based on the sex-based stereotype that mothers, particularly those with young children, neglect their work duties in favor of their presumed childcare obligations. To support this claim, Chadwick points to the fact that she was significantly more qualified for the promotion than was Ouelette, and also highlights three statements made by management around the time of the promotion decision.

First, on May 9, 2006, two months before the decision was reached, Miller, the decisionmaker, found out that Chadwick had three six-year-old children (in addition to an eleven-year-old son). Miller sent an email to Chadwick stating, "Oh my-I did not know you had triplets. Bless you!"
Second, during Chadwick's interview with Brink, her former supervisor, she was asked how she would respond if an associate did not complete a project on time. Unhappy with Chadwick's answer, Brink replied, "Laurie, you are a mother[.] [W]ould you let your kids off the hook that easy if they made a mess in [their] room[?] [W]ould you clean it or hold them accountable?"

Third, and most important, when Miller informed Chadwick that she did not get the promotion, Miller explained:

It was nothing you did or didn't do. It was just that you're going to school, you have the kids and you just have a lot on your plate right now.
In her deposition, Miller said that she decided not to promote Chadwick because she interviewed poorly, and that she (Miller) only told Chadwick that she had "too much on her plate" in an ill-advised attempt to soften the blow.
Here, Chadwick alleges that the subclass being discriminated against based on sex is women with children, particularly young children. Ultimately, regardless of the label given to the claim, the simple question posed by sex discrimination suits is whether the employer took an adverse employment action at least in part because of an employee's sex.

In the simplest terms, unlawful sex discrimination occurs when an employer takes an adverse job action on the assumption that a woman, because she is a woman, will neglect her job responsibilities in favor of her presumed childcare responsibilities. It is undoubtedly true that if the work performance of a woman (or a man, for that matter) actually suffers due to childcare responsibilities (or due to any other personal obligation or interest), an employer is free to respond accordingly, at least without incurring liability under Title VII. However, an employer is not free to assume that a woman, because she is a woman, will necessarily be a poor worker because of family responsibilities. The essence of Title VII in this context is that women have the right to prove their mettle in the work arena without the burden of stereotypes regarding whether they can fulfill their responsibilities.

Particularly telling is Miller's comment that, "It was nothing you did or didn't do." After all, the essence of employment discrimination is penalizing a worker not for something she did but for something she simply is. A reasonable jury could infer from Miller's explanation that Chadwick wasn't denied the promotion because of her work performance or her interview performance but because Miller and others assumed that as a woman with four young children, Chadwick would not give her all to her job.

This inference is supported by several facts. First, the decisionmaker learned of Chadwick's three six-year-olds just two months before she denied Chadwick the promotion. The young age and unusually high number of children would have been more likely to draw the decisionmaker'sattention and strengthen any sex-based concern she had that a woman with young children would be a poor worker.
In sum, we find that Chadwick has put forth sufficient evidence of discrimination that a reasonable jury could conclude that the promotion denial was more probably than not caused by discrimination. We only conclude that Chadwick has presented sufficient evidence of sex-based stereotyping to have her day in court. Given the common stereotype about the job performance of women with children and given the surrounding circumstantial evidence presented by Chadwick, we believe that a reasonable jury could find that WellPoint would not have denied a promotion to the new job, given "the kids" and her schooling.

Case Commentary

The First Circuit ruled that the statements referencing Chadwick's motherhood were sufficient for a jury to conclude that she was denied a promotion because of her small children

Read Case (Laurie Chadwick).

Prepare a 800- to 1,000-word paper in Microsoft® Word in the third person voice in which you analyze the case by addressing the following:

• What federal laws were violated according to the case? Explain how they were violated and why.

• Defend against or support the decision to promote the plaintiff.

• Identify which individuals in the case need training and development in the future to minimize risk in the employment selection processes.

• Assess training and development programs and explain what type of training and development is needed by the defendant company.

Required a title page and reference page.

Response should be format with APA guidelines.

Reference no: EM131030943

Questions Cloud

Application of turbulent flow in mechanical engineering : How to go about writing a term paper titled: application of turbulent flow in mechanical engineering.
Prepare a budgeted income statement for the month ended : Prepare a budgeted income statement for the month ended December for Adams Company. Prepare a statement of estimated cash flow for the month ended December for Adams Company.
Potential consequences of stevens academic dishonesty : What are the potential consequences of Steven''s academic dishonesty - What would you do if you were in a similar situation as Steven?
Draw an updated design class diagram : Draw an updated design class diagram that combines both use casesand includes classes, attributes, methods, and the updated navigation visibility.
What federal laws were violated according to the case : Identify which individuals in the case need training and development in the future to minimize risk in the employment selection processes. Assess training and development programs and explain what type of training and development is needed by the d..
Write assignment about fastening systems : The aim of this module is to develop practical and analytical understanding of the complex and multi-disciplinary nature of railways, and to provide students with an understanding of the economics of designing, building, maintaining and renewing ..
Compare and contrast conventional pegs and currency boards : Compare and contrast conventional pegs and currency boards. What are the factors that drive the choice between these two regimes? Explain the implications of "undervalued" currency pegs.
When the energy work in a closed system : When is the energy crossing the boundaries of a closed system heat and when is it work?
Discuss the usage of data in health care today : Describe the similarities and differences that exist between inpatient healthcare facilities and outpatient healthcare facilities. Give three examples of inpatient facilities and three examples of outpatient facilities. Be sure to include informat..

Reviews

Write a Review

 

HR Management Questions & Answers

  Identifying the cultural anchors of organization

Write a 3-4 page paper identifying the cultural anchors of your organization. What are the commonalities that distinguish your organization from other?

  Developing a market competitive pay system

Discuss the basic building blocks of developing a market competitive pay system, including the relationship between internal and external equity.

  Models of conceptualizing addiction

Compare and contrast two models of conceptualizing addiction. Write a 1,050-to 1,400-word paper briefly describing the models, how they are synergistic, or how they take competing views.

  Identify and define the experimental and control groups

Identify an article that directly references your chosen study and compare it to your findings. Does this article refute or confirm the study's findings - Identify and define the experimental and control groups?

  Describe the the responsibilities of the workers

Identify the union you would choose to help you organize and explain why. Describe the the responsibilities of the workers. Describe what the unions can do to help labor

  Assignment on self-assessment

Consider what role this course has played in helping you determine a dissertation topic approach. Has your original topic and approach changed? Why? How?

  Personal values support or conflict

In this first question, take a look at our individual values see how our personal values support or conflict. Make a list of your own working values as an individual and choose the top three. Post the top three to the discussion and reflect on wha..

  Find the vision statement of a company from its website

Find the vision statement of a company from its website or other sources (Vision statements for Wells Fargo, Hilton Hotel, 3M Dental Products Division, HJ Heinz, and Chevron can be found on pages 45 and 46 of the text.).

  From sweatshops to leadership in employment practices

Read the "Nike: From Sweatshops to Leadership in Employment Practices" case. You are to write a four to six (4-6) page paper that answers the following questions:

  Determine the monthly interest

A loan is completely renegotiated every 6 months. Determine the monthly interest due per $1000 if the interest rate is 5%.

  Dating-engagement

That should be like a presentation about 5 minutes which include 5 question:

  Basic requirements of an annual report

For your initial post, write a clear concise memo (no more than 250 words) that describes the contents of an annual report so marketing personnel can understand the basic requirements of an annual report. Reference this week's readings and lecture..

Free Assignment Quote

Assured A++ Grade

Get guaranteed satisfaction & time on delivery in every assignment order you paid with us! We ensure premium quality solution document along with free turntin report!

All rights reserved! Copyrights ©2019-2020 ExpertsMind IT Educational Pvt Ltd