Erenberg v. Methodist Hosp.

Citation357 F.3d 787
Decision Date04 February 2004
Docket NumberNo. 03-1398.,03-1398.
PartiesSandra J. ERENBERG, Plaintiff — Appellant, v. METHODIST HOSPITAL, Defendant — Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

Marshall H. Tanick, argued, Minneapolis, MN, for appellant.

Penelope J. Phillips, argued, Minneapolis, MN, for appellee.

Before BYE, HANSEN and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

MELLOY, Circuit Judge.

Sandra J. Erenberg appeals the district court's1 adverse grant of summary judgment in a case against her former employer, Methodist Hospital, claiming sexual harassment, age discrimination, and retaliatory discharge. We affirm.

I.

Viewed in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff, the facts are as follows. On August 10, 1998, Methodist Hospital ("Methodist") hired Sandra Erenberg to work as a health unit coordinator in the Emergency Room. Erenberg was hired to work forty-eight hours per pay period. Health unit coordinators at Methodist are hired for a particular shift and number of hours per pay period, not for specific days of the week, and hospital policies allow Methodist to change the work schedules of its employees as needed to handle the work flow. Methodist's attendance policy is a no-fault policy that expects employees to work at least 97% of their scheduled shifts. The policy does not distinguish between legitimate or illegitimate absences. Instead, all absences are counted against the employee unless they result from an approved leave of absence such as FMLA or jury duty.

Methodist stationed its health unit coordinators either at the control desk or in triage. Health unit coordinators at the control desk were required to take verbal orders from three physicians, communicate with the lab, and request x-rays. Those health unit coordinators at the triage desk would greet patients and record routine information. Erenberg began her employment working at the control desk.

Performance issues arose early in Erenberg's employment. Her supervisor, Joann Brand, observed that she was having trouble with speed and accuracy at the control desk. Brand responded by moving Erenberg to triage, which Brand perceived to be less stressful. Brand then received complaints that Erenberg was eating at the triage desk and being rude to patients. Erenberg admits to eating at her desk, but denies being rude to patients. Brand spoke to Erenberg at least twice in an attempt to correct the behavior.

Beginning in October 1998, Erenberg was absent from work a number of times due to illness. On one occasion, she was two hours late for work because her car broke down. These absences were counted against her, according to Methodist's attendance policy.

On March 29, 1999, Erenberg received her first written warning, for excessive absenteeism. On June 2, 1999, Erenberg received a second written warning for additional absences and alleged job performance deficiencies. The warning stated that:

Physician's ... orders have been entered incorrectly relating to Lab and X-rays and established procedures have not been followed, resulting in patient delays for physicians providing a diagnosis.

Other areas of concern have been the use of the telephone for personal reasons, especially when patients present themselves at triage. At times you have been rude to patients when approached. Frequently, you are consuming food at the triage desk, which is unacceptable.

In addition, proper procedure has not been followed when a patient presents themself at triage and you have directed them to the waiting area without first informing the triage nurse of the presenting complaint. At times, you have not followed direction given by the triage nurse.

In regards to attendance, you have been absent one time since given a written warning on March 26, 1999.

Improvement in job performance and attendance requires immediate improvement, otherwise further disciplinary action, including termination may occur....

Erenberg disagreed with the fairness of the reprimand, but did not believe that it was issued in a discriminatory manner.

During September 1999, Methodist received approximately fourteen complaints from within the department and three from outside the department regarding Erenberg's job performance. A number of complaints stated that Erenberg entered physician orders incorrectly and that Erenberg did not follow proper procedures when patients approached the triage desk. The complaints also stated that Erenberg continued to be rude and inattentive to patients, and that she made personal phone calls from the triage desk. The complaints also regarded Erenberg's attendance, including tardiness, leaving work early without finishing her tasks, and taking extended breaks. Erenberg denied that she was rude to patients. She claimed that she had permission for her extended breaks, and that other employees engaged in many of the same behaviors as she did, such as leaving work early.

Erenberg states that on the weekend of October 7-8, 1999, she was verbally attacked by another health unit coordinator, Tracy Archer. Erenberg complained to Brand and the charge nurse about the incident. Erenberg met with Brand and Sher Stiles, a charge nurse, to further discuss the encounter. Brand and Stiles indicated they would speak with Archer and follow-up with Erenberg. Stiles spoke with Archer, but failed to follow-up with Erenberg.

On October 18, 1999, Erenberg was given a third written warning and a three-day suspension for the complaints made against her in the previous month. She was required to draft a letter expressing her continued desire to work at Methodist and her plans for improvement. Erenberg filed an internal grievance on October 25, 1999.2 In the grievance, Erenberg stated that one health unit coordinator, whom she later identified as Archer, engaged in flirtatious sexual behavior with males at the workplace, and that excessive sexual conversations took place in the workplace.3

Erenberg also complained about a change in her work schedule which she found discriminatory. Erenberg reported that early that fall, two younger health unit coordinators were hired, and her schedule, as well as the schedule of 54-year-old Linda Ward, were changed to accommodate the new hires.

On October 28, 1999, Human Resources Director Mark Nordby met with Erenberg to address her concerns. In that meeting, Erenberg provided only Archer's name with regard to her complaints, and Nordby informed her he would be unable to investigate behavior by others without her identifying them. Erenberg reported that Archer flirted with male technicians and doctors, and that Archer occasionally touched males employees on the shoulder, arm, or back. Erenberg also stated that she was offended by sexual jokes in the workplace. In response, Nordby spoke to Archer, wrote a memorandum about the confrontation and added it to Archer's file, and provided Archer with a copy of Methodist's policy on harassment and offensive behavior. Nordby also asked Stiles to follow-up with Archer regarding her behavior. Nordby investigated the schedule change and the discipline of which Erenberg had complained, and concluded that both were in accord with Methodist's policies. Nordby followed up with Erenberg by written memorandum on December 9, 1999.

After her discussion with Nordby, Erenberg perceived that no action had been taken, and she went to the vice-president of Human Resources, Mr. LaPointe, to complain. LaPointe told her that "if [she didn't] like it here, [she] should find another job." App. 20, 168. Erenberg then talked to David Wessner, CEO, who agreed with the findings from her supervisors and mentioned that he conducts a sexual harassment seminar annually. Neither LaPointe nor Wessner did anything further.

In December 1999, Methodist received two more written complaints from Erenberg's co-workers about her behavior. One co-worker complained that Erenberg engaged in disrespectful and bossy behavior. Another co-worker complained that Erenberg told her that she was condescending and "uppity." In addition to these complaints, Erenberg's supervisor received several other complaints about Erenberg's behavior on the evening of December 18, 1999. During this time, Erenberg continued to have an absenteeism rate above 3%. Erenberg was terminated on December 29, 1999, at age 50.

II.

We review the District Court's grant of summary judgment de novo. Jackson v. Ark. Dep't of Educ., Vocational and Technical Educ. Div., 272 F.3d 1020, 1025 (8th Cir.2001). Summary judgment "shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admission on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). "The nonmoving party is entitled to benefit of all reasonable inferences to be drawn from the underlying facts in the record." Widoe v. Dist. # 111 Otoe County Sch., 147 F.3d 726, 728 (8th Cir.1998). However, "[t]he mere existence of a scintilla of evidence in support of the plaintiff's position will be insufficient; there must be evidence on which the jury could reasonably find for the plaintiff." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 252, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986). Rule 56(c) "mandates the entry of summary judgment, after adequate time for discovery and upon motion, against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial." Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986).

III.

Erenberg's hostile work environment claims are evaluated under the burden shifting analysis of McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973).4 Breeding v. Arthur J. Gallagher and Co., 164 F.3d 1151, 1156 (...

To continue reading

Request your trial
78 cases
  • Lopez v. Aramark Uniform & Career Apparel, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa
    • April 13, 2006
    ...Corp. No. 2, 397 F.3d 1063, 1068 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 126 S.Ct. 769, 163 L.Ed.2d 576 (2005); Erenberg v. Methodist Hosp., 357 F.3d 787, 792 (8th Cir.2004). In the case of coworker harassment, the fifth element requires a showing that the employer "knew or should have know......
  • Steck v. Francis
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa
    • April 21, 2005
    ...Inc., 398 F.3d 1040, 1047 (8th Cir.2005); Pedroza v. Cintas Corp. No. 2, 397 F.3d 1063, 1068 (8th Cir.2005); Erenberg v. Methodist Hosp., 357 F.3d 787, 792 (8th Cir.2004).4 iii. Actionable harassment. The element of the prima facie case that is principally in dispute here is the fourth one,......
  • Clay v. American
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Iowa
    • February 13, 2013
    ...not singled out on account of her gender; both male and female employees were subject to the same working environment.”), aff'd,357 F.3d 787 (8th Cir.2004). Regarding Lafarge's decision not to employ other African Americans, Clay has alleged with specificity only Lafarge's refusal to hire W......
  • Glandon v. Keokuk County Health Center
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Iowa
    • December 23, 2005
    ...County, 427 F.3d 1123, 1125 (8th Cir.2005); Grabovac v. Allstate Ins. Co., 426 F.3d 951, 955 (8th Cir.2005); Erenberg v. Methodist Hospital, 357 F.3d 787, 791 (8th Cir.2004); Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); see Baucom v. Holiday Companies, 428 F.3d 764, 766 (8th Cir.2005). The Court must view the facts......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
  • Theories of liability
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Litigating Sexual Harassment & Sex Discrimination Cases The substantive law
    • May 6, 2022
    ...(7th Cir. 2002) (back rubbing and inappropriate uniform inspection not su൶ciently severe or pervasive.) • Erenberg v. Methodist Hospital , 357 F.3d 787 (8th Cir. 2004) (plainti൵ had long documented history of poor performance, but alleged in her complaint that she was referred to as Malibu ......
  • Sexual harassment & discrimination digest
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Litigating Sexual Harassment & Sex Discrimination Cases Trial and post-trial proceedings
    • May 6, 2022
    ...documentation of employee performance issues and lack of severity of conduct when employee complained. Erenberg v. Methodist Hospital, 357 F.3d 787 (8th Cir. 2004). See digital access for the full case summary. See also §80.10. Prompt response to complaint, Meriwether v. Caraustar Packaging......
  • Disabling Complexity: the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 and Its Interaction With Other Federal Laws
    • United States
    • University of Nebraska - Lincoln Nebraska Law Review No. 38, 2022
    • Invalid date
    ...v. River Valley Sch. Dist., 197 F.3d 804, 808 n.1 (6th Cir. 1999); Mason, 82 F.3d at 1009. 469. See, e.g., Erenberg v. Methodist Hosp., 357 F.3d 787, 792 (8th Cir. 2004); Cain v. Blackwell, 246 F.3d 758, 760 (5th Cir. 2001); Fenton v. HiSAN, Inc., 174 F.3d 827, 830 (6th Cir. 1999); Walton, ......
  • Disabling Complexity: the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 and Its Interaction With Other Federal Laws
    • United States
    • Creighton University Creighton Law Review No. 38, 2004
    • Invalid date
    ...v. River Valley Sch. Dist., 197 F.3d 804, 808 n.1 (6th Cir. 1999); Mason, 82 F.3d at 1009. 469. See, e.g., Erenberg v. Methodist Hosp., 357 F.3d 787, 792 (8th Cir. 2004); Cain v. Blackwell, 246 F.3d 758, 760 (5th Cir. 2001); Fenton v. HiSAN, Inc., 174 F.3d 827, 830 (6th Cir. 1999); Walton, ......

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