Dupont-Lauren v. Schneider (Usa), Inc.

Decision Date21 January 1998
Docket NumberNo. CIV. A. H-95-5345.,CIV. A. H-95-5345.
PartiesRandi DUPONT-LAUREN, Plaintiff, v. SCHNEIDER (USA), INC. and Pfizer, Inc., Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas

Ulmer Graydon Wilson, Richard Haynes & Associates, Fritz Barnett, Barnett and Craddock, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff.

Gayla C. Crain, Jonni Walls, Epstein Becker and Green, Dallas, TX, Carole Dominguin Brown, Pfizer Inc., Legal Counsel, New York, NY, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CRONE, United States Magistrate Judge.

Pending before the court is Defendant Pfizer Inc.'s ("Pfizer") Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, or in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment (# 49) and Defendants Pfizer and Schneider (USA), Inc.'s ("Schneider") Motion for Summary Judgment (# 50). Having reviewed the pending motions, the submissions of the parties, the pleadings, and the applicable law, this court is of the opinion that Pfizer and Schneider's motion for summary judgment should be granted, rendering Defendant Pfizer's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings moot.

I. Background

On February 8, 1988, Randi Dupont-Lauren ("Dupont-Lauren"), a female, began working for Schneider and Pfizer (collectively "the companies") as a technical sales representative in Schneider's cardiology division.1 Schneider is a corporation engaged in the development, manufacture, and sale of pharmaceuticals and medical devices. At all times relevant to this suit, Schneider was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Pfizer. Prior to working for Schneider, Dupont-Lauren was employed by Schneider's predecessor, Angiomedics. During Dupont-Lauren's term of employment, Schneider's sales structure was organized into five regions, two of which were managed by women, and three of which were managed by men. Each regional sales manager received compensation that entailed a salary, a car allowance, and commissions based upon the sales volume and commissions earned by the sales representatives and senior sales representatives who served under the regional manager. Dupont-Lauren contends that because senior sales representatives have a higher volume than do regular sales representatives, the number of senior sales representatives assigned to a region directly affects the level of compensation received by the regional sales manager.

Dupont-Lauren alleges that she has experienced discriminatory treatment by Schneider since at least 1989. In October 1989, Dupont-Lauren applied for a management position in the peripheral division of Schneider. She was not offered the position allegedly because she looked too young. Later, in January 1991, she became Schneider's regional sales manager for the southern region of the United States, peripheral division. In February 1992, Dupont-Lauren was transferred to the position of acting regional sales manager for the western region of the United States, cardiology division. While in that position, she improved the region's sales performance so that it progressed from last place to first. Commensurate with this feat, Dupont-Lauren received the sales manager of the year award for 1991. In August 1992, Dupont-Lauren was transferred to the position of regional sales manager for the newly organized southwestern region of the United States, cardiology division. This was done on the recommendation of John W. House, Jr. ("House"), former national director of sales for Schneider and Dupont-Lauren's immediate supervisor, Bob Thatcher ("Thatcher"), former director of sales and marketing for Schneider, and Joe Laptewicz ("Laptewicz"), former president of Schneider.2

While serving as regional sales director for the southwestern region, Dupont-Lauren received the regional manager of the year award in 1992 and 1993 based on her management skills and volume of sales. In 1993, House gave Dupont-Lauren the highest possible rating, "excellent," in his evaluations. She received excellent ratings for leadership, communication skills, employee development, project management, and change in management. She was commended for being able to adapt to changing circumstances and for remaining active with training programs. In his deposition, however, House testified that Dupont-Lauren had good sales figures, but was continually deficient in areas relating to interpersonal skills and promoting the company's objectives.

At deposition, House set forth a litany of purported deficiencies in Dupont-Lauren's personality, habits, and management style. He stated that almost every sales representative in Dupont-Lauren's region complained about her and her management style on at least one occasion. For example, Jean Kallaky, a sales representative for Schneider, complained that some physicians with whom she worked did not like Dupont-Lauren's personality. Additionally, House observed that Dupont-Lauren did not attend portions of a sales meeting in September 1994 and was absent from an information booth at national medical meetings on several occasions. House also received complaints about Dupont-Lauren's rudeness from Tim Howard, Schneider's product manager, and from several customer service representatives including Bonnie Craven.

House also related that he expended approximately eighty percent of his time addressing problems that arose out of Dupont-Lauren's sales region. He further asserted that Dupont-Lauren's poor interpersonal skills actually cost Schneider sales opportunities. According to House, Dave Hilfer and Sheila Rooney from St. Luke's Hospital ("St. Luke's") in Houston, Texas, requested that Dupont-Lauren not come to the hospital. Previously, St. Luke's had been one of Schneider's largest accounts. House opined that Schneider's loss of business at St. Luke's was a direct result of Dupont-Lauren's activities there. The staff's objection to Dupont-Lauren's presence at the hospital was reportedly based on their aversion to her abrasive style. House also stated that he admonished Dupont-Lauren regarding her deficient personal skills when he witnessed her berating Jim Foster, a Schneider sales representative. In addition, Laptewicz testified at deposition that he received complaints about Dupont-Lauren's interpersonal skills from employees such as Bill Mason, Schneider's director of sales.

Dupont-Lauren, however, contends that Schneider and Pfizer discriminated against her because of her sex in various instances. First, she alleges that the female regional sales managers had one senior sales representative assigned to their regions, while the male regional sales managers had two or more. This, she argues, resulted in lower commissions for the female managers. Dupont-Lauren contends that the apportionment of senior sales representatives demonstrates a pattern and practice of discrimination against female regional sales managers with respect to their compensation. The fact that Schneider had no female managers when she began her employment there, she submits, is also illustrative of Schneider's discriminatory practices.

Dupont-Lauren admits in her responses to the companies' interrogatories, however, that Schneider did not intentionally discriminate against her through work-assignment policies, procedures, or practices. Further, Dupont-Lauren conceded in her deposition that a promotion to a senior sales representative position is dependent upon several factors, including a prerequisite of three years employment as a sales representative, attainment of sales forecasts for two out of three years, and a recommendation by the sales representative's regional manager, the position that Dupont-Lauren held. Dupont-Lauren further admitted that the reason she had fewer senior sales representatives was "due to the newness of the representatives" whom she managed. Laptewicz's deposition testimony also underscores that the promotion of sales representatives to senior sales representative positions was based on the consensus of the national sales manager, regional manager, and the human resources department; the national sales manager could not create a senior sales representative position on his own volition. Moreover, Schneider does not require its sales representatives to relocate in order to equalize the distribution of senior sales representatives in each region. Additionally, Dupont-Lauren admits that, despite the reduced commissions earned because of the allocation of senior sales representatives, her total compensation from Schneider increased every year from 1992 until she resigned in 1996.

Dupont-Lauren also maintains that she was discriminated against in January 1994, when she received the runner-up regional manager of the year award rather than the regional manager of the year award. Schneider gave this distinction to Tom Doorley ("Doorley"). She alleges that Laptewicz informed her that Doorley received the award because management had "loaded Mr. Doorley's numbers so that he would get the award" instead of Dupont-Lauren.

She further contends that the companies discriminated against her by failing to promote her to any position higher than regional sales manager. In March 1993, Schneider promoted Troy Phelps ("Phelps") to the position of regional manager of the peripheral division. Dupont-Lauren alleges that in October and November 1992, she discussed a transfer to the peripheral division with Steve Healy ("Healy"), former national sales director of Schneider's peripheral division. She asserts that she was better qualified for the position than Phelps because he had worked for the company for only a year and had no management experience. In March 1993, after Schneider awarded Phelps the regional manager position, Dupont-Lauren contacted Jan Dick ("Dick"), Schneider's vice president of human resources, to inquire about the promotion of Phelps and to inform Dick that she wanted to be considered for national sales positions in both the cardiology and peripheral...

To continue reading

Request your trial
26 cases
  • Smith v. Alabama Dept. of Public Safety, CIV.A.98-D-340-N.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Alabama
    • 20 Septiembre 1999
    ...`[the employee] cannot claim her informal complaints amounted to an activity protected by federal law.'" Dupont-Lauren v. Schneider (USA), Inc., 994 F.Supp. 802, 822 (S.D.Tex.1998) (quoting Bray v. Tenax Corp., 905 F.Supp. 324, 328 (E.D.N.C. 1995)). Furthermore, the Eleventh Circuit has hel......
  • Petrosky v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 96-CV-0902 DRH.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of New York
    • 15 Noviembre 1999
    ......Fed. R.Civ.P. 56(e); Rexnord Holdings, Inc. v. Bidermann, 21 F.3d 522, 525-26 (2d Cir. 1994). .         The ...Bath Iron Works Corp., 943 F.2d 164, 166 (1st Cir.1991); Dupont-Lauren v. Schneider (USA), Inc., 994 F.Supp. 802, . Page 52 . 816 ......
  • E.E.O.C. v. Omni Hotels Management Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Texas
    • 26 Septiembre 2007
    ...(cryptic remarks regarding gender-based discrimination insufficient to constitute a protected activity); Dupont-Lauren v. Schneider (USA), Inc., 994 F.Supp. 802, 823 (S.D.Tex.1998) (Plaintiff "did not complain of any specific activity that she believed to be unlawful, nor did she accuse any......
  • Callahan v. Bancorpsouth Ins. Services of Miss., CIV.A. 1:01-CV-62(BR).
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Mississippi
    • 28 Febrero 2002
    ...to an unlawful employment practice unless it refers to and opposes a specific practice of the employer. See Dupont-Lauren v. Schneider, Inc., 994 F.Supp. 802, 823 (S.D.Tex.1998) (holding employee's statement did not constitute opposition where she made vague comments that failed to apprize ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
  • Defendant's jury instructions & questions: sex discrimination, retaliation and FLSA violations (fed.)
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Texas Employment Law. Volume 2 - 2014 Appendices Trial
    • 16 Agosto 2023
    ...88 F.3d 300, 304-305, n.4 (5th Cir. 1996). 11 Model Civ. Jury Instr. (8th Cir. 1999) §5.94 212 Dupont-Lauren v. Schneider (USA), Inc., 994 F.Supp. 802, 825 (S.D. Tex. 1998); Skinner v. Brown, 951 F.Supp. 1307, 1321 (S.D. Tex. 1996); Patton v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 910 F.Supp. 1250, 1......
  • Defendant's Jury Instructions and Questions: Sex Discrimination, Retaliation and FLSA Violations (Fed.)
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Texas Employment Law. Volume 2 - 2016 Appendices Trial Forms
    • 30 Julio 2023
    ...88 F.3d 300, 304-305, n.4 (5th Cir. 1996). 11 Model Civ. Jury Instr. (8th Cir. 1999) §5.94 212 Dupont-Lauren v. Schneider (USA), Inc., 994 F.Supp. 802, 825 (S.D. Tex. 1998); Skinner v. Brown, 951 F.Supp. 1307, 1321 (S.D. Tex. 1996); Patton v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 910 F.Supp. 1250, 1......
  • Defendant's jury instructions & questions: sex discrimination, retaliation and FLSA violations (fed.)
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Texas Employment Law. Volume 2 - 2017 Appendices Trial
    • 19 Agosto 2023
    ...88 F.3d 300, 304-305, n.4 (5th Cir. 1996). 11 Model Civ. Jury Instr. (8th Cir. 1999) §5.94 212 Dupont-Lauren v. Schneider (USA), Inc., 994 F.Supp. 802, 825 (S.D. Tex. 1998); Skinner v. Brown, 951 F.Supp. 1307, 1321 (S.D. Tex. 1996); Patton v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 910 F.Supp. 1250, 1......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT