BARKHOFF v. BOSSARD NORTH AMERICA, INC.
| Decision Date | 28 January 2010 |
| Docket Number | No. C09-2007.,C09-2007. |
| Citation | 684 F. Supp.2d 1096 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of West Virginia |
| Parties | Keevin BARKHOFF, Plaintiff, v. BOSSARD NORTH AMERICA, INC., Defendant. |
Bruce L. Gettman, Jr., Mark W. Fransdal, Redfern, Mason, Dieter, Larsen & Moore, PC, Cedar Falls, IA, for Plaintiff.
Diane M. Reinsch, Lane & Waterman, Rock Island, IL, Charles E. Miller, Lane & Waterman, Davenport, IA, for Defendant.
RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1100
II. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1100
III. RELEVANT FACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1100
IV. LEGAL STANDARD FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1104
V. DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1104
A. Sexual Harassment and Retaliation Claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1104
B. Age Discrimination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1105
1. Direct Evidence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1105
2. Circumstantial Evidence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1107
a. Barkhoff's prima facie Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1107
b. Bossard's Legitimate Non-Discriminatory Reason. . . . . . . .1108
c. Pretext . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1108
3. Barkhoff's State Age Discrimination Claim. . . . . . . . . . . .1109
C. Sex Discrimination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1110
1. Direct Evidence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1111
2. Circumstantial Evidence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1111
a. Barkhoff's Prima Facie Case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1111
b. Bossard's Legitimate Non-Discriminatory Reason . . . . . . .1112
c. Pretext. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1113
VI. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1114 VII. ORDER. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1114
This matter comes before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment (docket number 13) filed by Defendant Bossard North America, Inc. on December 14, 2009; the Resistance (docket number 16) filed by Plaintiff Keevin Barkhoff on January 7, 2010; and the Reply (docket number 20) filed by Defendant on January 20, 2010. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.c, the Motion for Summary Judgment will be decided without oral argument.
Plaintiff Keevin Barkhoff ("Barkhoff") timely filed charges of age and sex discrimination in employment against Defendant Bossard North America, Inc. with the Iowa Civil Rights Commission ("ICRC"). The charges were also cross-filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). On November 20, 2008, the ICRC issued an Administrative Release (right-to-sue letter) to Barkhoff with respect to her charges of age and sex discrimination. On December 23, 2008, the EEOC also issued Barkhoff a Notice of Right to Sue.
On February 13, 2009, Barkhoff filed a Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial (docket number 2) alleging age discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (Count I), age discrimination in violation of the Iowa Civil Rights Act ("ICRA"), Iowa Code Chapter 216 (Count II), sex discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (Count III), and sex discrimination in violation of the ICRA, Iowa Code Chapter 216 (Count IV). On March 23, 2009, Defendant filed an Answer and Demand for Jury Trial (docket number 5), generally denying the material allegations contained in the complaint, and asserting certain affirmative defenses. On May 19, 2009, both parties consented to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to the provisions set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Trial is scheduled before the undersigned on April 19, 2010. Defendant filed the instant Motion for Summary Judgment (docket number 13) on December 14, 2009.
Defendant Bossard North America, Inc. is based in Cedar Falls, Iowa, and is engaged in the business of procuring and selling fasteners and fastening technology to manufacturers. Bossard North America, Inc. is part of the Bossard Group, a global group of companies engaged in the procurement and sale of every type of fastening element. The Bossard Group holding company, Bossard Holding AG, is headquarted in Zug, Switzerland.
Before her termination, Plaintiff Keevin Barkhoff was an employee of Defendant Bossard North America, Inc. ("Bossard") for approximately twenty-three years. She began working for Bossard's predecessor company, Iowa Industrial Products, Inc. ("IIP"), in October 1985. Bossard acquired IIP in 1999.1
When she started working at IIP, Barkhoff described her job as helping customers purchase fasteners and performing customer service follow-up. After acquiring IIP, Bossard implemented a new purchasing philosophy, made changes to the overall purchasing process and purchasing practices, put into operation new systems, and restructured job descriptions. In February 2001, Barkhoff's position with Bossard was entitled Purchasing Agent. As a Purchasing Agent, Barkhoff was required to coordinate activities involved with procuring goods and services for specific accounts. In January 2006, Barkhoff's position changed to Material Planner. In her position as Material Planner, Barkhoff was required her to analyze customer demand and take action to procure needed materials or adjust purchases to minimize a customer's exposure to excess inventory. Later, Bossard phased out the Material Planner position, and in May 2007, Barkhoff's position changed to Buyer.2
Beginning in July 2005, Barkhoff's supervisor, Rick Nolan ("Nolan"), asked Barkhoff about her retirement plans three to four times per year.3 Nolan also asked Barkhoff about her retirement plans in 2003 and 2004, but for training purposes only. According to Barkhoff, she did not find Nolan's 2003 and 2004 inquiries to be discriminatory because he was asking about her retirement plans for business reasons. Barkhoff found Nolan's 2005 and subsequent inquiries discriminatory, however, because she felt that his retirement questions were made in a suggestive or encouraging manner.4
In June 2005, Barkhoff received a salary increase of 1.94%. She did not receive any raises or salary adjustments after 2005. In 2006 and 2007, Barkhoff asked Nolan why she did not receive any increase in her level of compensation. According to Nolan, he explained to Barkhoff in both 2006 and 2007, that based on merit and the fact that she already earned more than the other employees in her department, she would not receive any type of raise.5 Barkhoff claims, however, that Nolan only told her that she earned more than anyone else in the department, and she would never receive another raise.6
In 2007, Barkhoff was disciplined twice for insubordination. Specifically, on February 7, 2007, Barkhoff was suspended for one day without pay for refusing to obey instructions given by her manager. On December 18, 2007, Barkhoff was given a final warning for insubordination and lack of teamwork/cooperation. The incident report stated:
The feedback and personal observations I have from this time period (November 26, 2007 through December 14, 2007) confirm that Barkhoff has not been conducting herself in a positive and professional manner. There have been complaints from CRM and suppliers of Barkhoff getting upset and hanging up during phone calls. At recent staff meetings Barkhoff has been abrupt and discourteous and has walked out. Barkhoff has displayed an extremely negative attitude combined with harsh criticism that has been disruptive to the purchasing environment. Barkhoff's actions and behavior do not represent the image and personal conduct desired for our purchasing staff at Bossard.
See Bossard's Appendix to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (docket number 13-2) at 191; Exhibit I, Incident Report. Prior to 2007, Barkhoff had never been disciplined by Bossard.
In January 2008, Kai von Buddenbrock became Director of Purchasing. Barkhoff alleges that shortly after he took over the Director of Purchasing position, she heard von Buddenbrock make statements on two occasions, that Bossard should hire young men so that Bossard could mold them in the way it wanted.7 In April 2008, Bossard hired four younger men to work in the purchasing department.8
In June 2008, eastern Iowa was affected by a major flood. On June 10, 2008, Bossard sent an email to employees advising them that if they needed to prepare for the flood at home or in their neighborhood, they could leave work to do so. After work on June 10, Barkhoff and her husband went to their lake home on Lake Delhi—near Manchester, Iowa—to check on their house and boat. Having already scheduled a vacation day for Friday, June 13, Barkhoff decided to stay at their lake home on June 11 and 12, to monitor the flood situation. On June 11, Barkhoff left a voicemail with the receptionist at Bossard, informing Bossard that she would not be at work on June 11 or 12, because she was staying at her home on Lake Delhi to monitor the flooding situation. Barkhoff had six days of vacation remaining when she decided to take off from work on June 11 and 12.
On June 12, 2008, von Buddenbrock emailed Barkhoff and received an out-of-office reply.9 Von Buddenbrock emailed Shari Kriegel ("Kriegel"), Barkhoff's Team Leader, and inquired as to why Barkhoff was not at work. Kriegel replied that Barkhoff's daughter, also an employee at Bossard, informed her that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Menge v. Simon's Trucking, Inc.
... ... termination.” Barkhoff v. Bossard N. Am., ... Inc., 684 F.Supp.2d 1096, 1106 (N.D. Iowa ... ...
-
Green v. City of Hughes
...and the plaintiff employee's termination undercut a finding of direct evidence of discrimination); Barkhoff v. Bossard N. America, 684 F. Supp. 2d 1096, 1106 (N.D. Iowa 2010) (same but with a six-month lapse). In Twymon v. Wells Fargo & Co., the plaintiff employee's supervisor referred to h......
-
Glover v. Am. Credit Acceptance
... ... Braden v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc ., 588 F.3d 585, 594 ... (8 th Cir. 2009) (quoting ... decision process.'” Barkhoff v. Bossard North ... America, Inc. , 684 F.Supp.2d ... ...