Hansen v. Robert Half Int'l, Inc., No. A10–1558.

• Decision Date: 30 May 2012
• Docket Number: No. A10–1558.
• Parties: Kim HANSEN, Appellant, v. ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONAL, INC., Respondent.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

813 N.W.2d 906

19 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 1298

Kim HANSEN, Appellant,

v.ROBERT HALF INTERNATIONAL, INC., Respondent.

No. A10–1558.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

May 30, 2012.

Syllabus by the Court

1. An employee is only required to state a qualifying reason for leave under the Minnesota Parenting Leave Act (“MPLA”), Minn.Stat. §§ 181.940–181.944 (2010), to invoke the protections of the Act. Because appellant clearly indicated childbirth as the reason for taking leave, she is entitled to the protections of the MPLA.

2. An extension of MPLA leave does not extend the right to reinstatement under the statute. Even though there is a genuine dispute of material fact regarding whether appellant's MPLA leave was extended, she was not entitled to reinstatement, as a matter of law, because her right to reinstatement under the MPLA was never extended. The district court, therefore, did not err in granting summary judgment to respondent on appellant's right to reinstatement claim under the MPLA.

3. Because appellant failed to plead a retaliation claim under the MPLA in her amended complaint, the district court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of respondent on appellant's retaliation claim.

4. Because there is no genuine dispute of material fact that respondent engaged in a bona fide reduction in force and that appellant failed to show that her pregnancy was a factor in respondent's termination decision, the district court did not err in granting summary judgment to respondent on appellant's sex discrimination claim under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (“MHRA”), Minn.Stat. § 363A.08 (2010).

Thomas A. Harder, Greta Bauer Reyes, Foley & Mansfield, PLLP, Minneapolis, MN, for appellant.

Dayle Nolan, Susan E. Tegt, Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Ltd., Bloomington, MN, for respondent.

OPINION

ANDERSON, G. BARRY, Justice.

This case involves an employment termination dispute in which appellant Kim Hansen challenges the district court's summary judgment determination that her employer, respondent Robert Half International, Inc. (“RHI”), did not violate the Minnesota Parenting Leave Act (“MPLA”), Minn.Stat. §§ 181.941–181.944 (2010), or the Minnesota Human Rights Act (“MHRA”), Minn.Stat. § 363A.08 (2010), when it terminated Hansen's employment shortly after she returned from maternity leave and failed to reinstate her to the same or a similar position. Because we agree that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that judgment is appropriate as a matter of law, we affirm.

RHI's Business

RHI is an international staffing service registered to do business in the State of Minnesota. Two of its divisions are Office Team and Robert Half Legal (“RHL”). RHL places lawyers, paralegals, law clerks, and legal support professionals on a temporary and permanent basis throughout the United States.

RHL's United States operations are divided into three zones: the Eastern Zone, the Central Zone, and the Western Zone. The Minneapolis office of RHL is in the Central Zone. The other offices in the Central Zone are in Chicago, Illinois; Dallas, Texas; Houston, Texas; Denver, Colorado; Columbus, Ohio; and Saint Louis, Missouri.

The Central Zone was supervised by the zone president, Bob Clark. Beginning in October 2008, Marilyn Bird managed the Central Zone operations of RHL as district director; she reported directly to Clark. Beginning in the fall of 2007, the branch manager of the Minneapolis office of RHL, who reported to Bird, was Amber Hennen. The division directors, who supervised teams of recruiting managers or account executives within the Minneapolis office, reported to Hennen. In April 2004, RHI hired appellant Kim Hansen as a staffing manager in the Office Team division. She held this position until 2006, when she was transferred to the RHL division as a member of the team that placed permanent candidates. Hennen was Hansen's direct supervisor from September 2007 until Hansen's position was eliminated in December 2008. Prior to the summer of 2008, Hennen was supervised by a regional manager, Jackie Moes. In the summer of 2008, the regional manager position was eliminated, and Moes joined RHI's management resources team.

Within the Minneapolis office of RHL, employees are assigned to the permanent placement team (“perm team”) or temporary placement team (“temp team”). Recruiting managers are responsible for placement of permanent candidates, while account executives are responsible for placement of temporary employees. Due to the immediate nature of many of the temporary staffing requests, the temp team has less flexible work hours. Employees on the temp team are required to be present during normal office hours, from 7:30 a.m. until 5:30 p.m., and to stay after 5:30 p.m. if client needs necessitate it.

RHL evaluates the performance of employees on its perm team based on their production using monthly calculations known as “per desk average” (“PDA”). The PDA represents the total monthly production of each member, averaged over a number of months. An employee's “production” is comprised of the fees paid by entities using RHL's placement services. In general, perm team members who have been in their positions for at least 9 months are expected to have an average PDA of $25,000 each month. Employees are evaluated in relation to their PDA because their actual production numbers may fluctuate from month to month. Initially, new employees have lower billing expectations; RHL expects $30,000 in total billings from new employees in the first 3 months (i.e., $10,000 a month), then $20,000 per month for the next 4 to 8 months, then full production ($25,000) after 9 months.

Hansen testified that while the “expected PDA is $25,000,” there is a “bottom line cutoff” of $16,000. Moes testified that she told Hansen that there was an absolute PDA baseline of roughly $16,000 or $17,000 required in order to avoid layoff at RHL.

Hansen's Employment History

On April 6, 2004, RHI hired Hansen as a staffing manager in the Office Team division. As a staffing manager, Hansen placed administrative professionals into temporary positions. She held this position until March 2006, when she requested a transfer to the RHL division after her return from maternity leave for the birth of her first child. Hansen requested the transfer because she wanted a reduced workday so that she could manage her child's daycare schedule. After this transfer, Hansen worked for RHL's perm team. In contrast to a typical member of the perm team who worked from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 or 5:30 p.m., Hansen worked from 8:00 a.m. until 3:00 or 3:30 p.m. Despite Hansen's reduced schedule, she was expected to meet the same production goals as all other full-time employees of the perm team. Initially, Hansen was only responsible for recruiting candidates, not for marketing to clients. In the spring of 2007, Hansen became a recruiting manager after the resignation of another employee. Hansen inherited a book of business from the resigning employee, which increased her production numbers. Hansen's PDA in 2007 was approximately $26,811.74.

Hansen was promoted to division director around January 1, 2008. As a division director, Hansen was responsible for marketing to clients and placing candidates, as well as supervising the performance of others on the perm team. Soon after her promotion, Hansen's production numbers began to decline and were below what was expected from a division director. During the first quarter of 2008, Hansen's PDA was the lowest on the perm team in the Minneapolis office, given her tenure.¹ Bird noticed that Hansen was underperforming in the division director role. Bird participated in frequent discussions with Clark, Moes, Hennen, and RHI's legal department regarding Hansen's underperformance throughout 2008. Additionally, Moes and Hennen held regular discussions with Hansen about her performance during the spring of 2008. In March 2008, Moes reduced the number of employees Hansen supervised so that Hansen could increase her personal production. Even after this reduction in responsibilities, Hansen's production numbers continued to decline; her production numbers for the months of March and April were $19,900 and $18,087, respectively, below the expected $25,000 PDA.

Due to Hansen's failure to increase her PDA, Moes made the decision to demote Hansen from her position as division director back to her role as recruiting manager. Hansen was not immediately replaced as division director, but ultimately Jessica Kuhl assumed this position.

After her return to the role of recruiting manager, Hansen's production numbers increased, although her second-quarter PDA of $22,522.58 was below the level expected of a recruiting manager with her experience. As of mid–2008, Hansen's PDA was $20,296.60. Consequently, her immediate supervisors, Hennen and Kuhl (who had taken over Hansen's role as division director by this time) met with Hansen to talk about her underperformance and to inform her that she needed to bill a minimum of $27,000 for the month of August. Hansen's production numbers were $18,007.50 in July and $8,050.00 in August.

Hansen's Pregnancy

Hansen learned she was pregnant with her second child in late January 2008. Hennen learned of Hansen's pregnancy in January or February 2008. At some point, Hansen advised Hennen that her doctors suggested she might have medical complications related to the pregnancy. By the summer, Hansen began to experience pregnancy-related health problems. Hennen advised Hansen that she had the option of taking an early maternity leave to address any health issues related to her pregnancy, but Hansen did not accept the offer. Instead, Hansen worked part-time for the last 2 weeks of her pregnancy.

Hansen gave birth to her second child on August 29, 2008. Her leave of absence began that day. The leave of absence form completed and signed by Hansen selects “section A” as the type of leave that she was requesting....