Williams v. H & H Auto Parts, LLC
| Decision Date | 30 January 2020 |
| Docket Number | 8:18-CV-137 |
| Parties | SAWNYA J. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant, v. H & H AUTO PARTS, LLC, Defendant and Counter-Claimant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Nebraska |
This is an employment-discrimination case with counterclaims for breach of contract and defamation. It comes before the Court on Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment as to all of Plaintiff's claims (Filing 90); Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment as to both of Defendant's counterclaims (Filing 93); and Plaintiff's Motion to Strike and/or Leave to Surreply (Filing 103). For the reasons stated herein, the Court grants Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment in part; grants Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment on Defendant's counterclaims; and denies Plaintiff's Motion to Strike and/or Leave to Surreply.
Plaintiff, Sawnya Williams,1 began working for Defendant, H&H Auto Parts, LLC (H&H), on January 7, 2016. Filing 98-1 at 2. H&H is located in Cozad, Nebraska, and sells salvage auto parts. Filing 92-1 at 1. Williams is female and at the time she applied to and was hired by H&H, she was forty years old. Filing 92-31 at 9; see generally Filing 98-1. Initially, Williams applied fora salesperson/customer service job at H&H. Filing 92-31 at 97; Filing 98-3 at 1. After receiving her application, however, Autym Kosiski, the daughter of H&H's co-owners Zane and Joscelyn Malcom, contacted Williams to ask if she would be interested in applying for a commodities-broker position instead. Filing 92-31 at 36; Filing 92-23 at 2. Williams agreed to an interview for the commodities-broker job. Filing 92-31 at 36.
During her interview, Williams claims Zane told her she was "too old" for a sales position and "that he needed a young male to do that position" and that was why he wanted her in the commodities-broker role instead. Filing 92-31 at 175. Zane denied making any comment on Williams's age or gender or stating that age or gender was a job requirement for any position at H&H. Filing 92-1 at 3. Kosiski participated in the interview and also denied that Zane had made any age- or gender-related statements. Filing 92-23 at 2. After the interview, Williams accepted the commodities-broker job. Filing 92-1 at 3; Filing 92-31 at 37. She started at an initial pay rate of $17 per hour. Filing 92-1 at 3. Zane and Plaintiff discussed the possibility of her moving to commission-based pay in the future. Filing 92-1 at 3-4.
The commodities-broker job was a relatively new aspect of H&H's business. Filing 92-1 at 1-2. It began when H&H partnered with Cunningham Brothers, a Virginia-based company, starting in 2014 to domestically recapture auto-parts commodities business for original equipment manufacturers which would otherwise go overseas. Filing 92-1 at 2. As commodities broker, Williams received a list of parts that H&H was trying to procure for its partner companies. Filing 92-31 at 23. Williams would look for the requested parts and try to purchase them at the lowest possible price so H&H could resell them for a profit. Filing 92-31 at 23-24. In contrast to a sales position, Williams filled existing purchase orders for resale rather than making new sales. Filing 92-1 at 7. Williams was supervised by Zane, while the sales staff reported to the sales manager.Filing 98-1 at 2. Williams had weekly meetings with Zane and Cunningham Brothers staff while the sales staff had a separate weekly meeting in which Williams did not participate. Filing 98-1 at 6; Filing 98-7 at 2. Williams agrees that there was no one "else at H & H who was responsible for doing those broker duties of trying to buy the parts." Filing 92-31 at 29.
Prior to Williams being hired as commodities broker, the position had been held part-time by Kosiski and then full-time by Tiffany Thurn. Filing 92-1 at 2. Kosiski worked part-time as commodities broker and was paid at the rate of $15.50 per hour. Filing 92-1 at 2; 92-7 at 2. Thurn worked in the role for approximately six months beginning in August 2015 and was initially paid $13 per hour before receiving a raise to $14 per hour. Filing 92-7 at 2. Both Kosiski and Thurn are female and were under the age of forty when they worked in the commodities-broker role at H&H. Filing 92-7 at 2.
Outside of H&H, a Cunningham Brothers employee named Stephanie Williams2 performed similar job duties to Williams. Filing 92-31 at 24-25. Stephanie Williams was located in Virginia and worked closely with Williams on the phone. Filing 92-31 at 25. Stephanie Williams and Williams would both act as brokers to buy parts to fulfill existing orders and would contact parts-suppliers in separate regions of the country. Filing 92-31 at 25; Filing 92-25 at 1-2. H&H had no part in paying Stephanie Williams or setting her pay rate. Filing 92-25 at 1-2.
In contrast to how Williams was paid in the commodities-broker role, salespeople at H&H were generally paid on a commission basis after an initial salaried probationary period. Filing 92-1 at 3. Ryan Rahmann, a male under 40 years of age, was hired in sales in September 2014 at an hourly rate of $15. Filing 92-7 at 2; Filing 92-14 at 1. After six months, Rahmann moved to commission-based pay. Filing 92-7 at 2-3. Thomas Ramirez, a male under the age of 40, was hiredas a salesperson in August 2016 at an hourly rate of $14. Filing 92-7 at 3. John Wilcox, another salesperson, was hired in 2012 and was paid based on commissions by the time Williams started at H&H. Filing 92-7 at 2. Zach Horse was the sales manager. Filing 92-24 at 1; Filing 92-31 at 21. When he started at H&H in a sales role, he was paid between $11 and $12 an hour. Filing 98-21 at 12. Horse testified that sales representatives at H&H's Cozad location made between $40,000 and $60,000 annually. Filing 98-21 at 26.
On March 25, 2016, H&H had Williams sign a nondisclosure agreement. Filing 92-16. In relevant part, it provided:
The Employee shall not disclose to any person, firm, or corporation any trade, technical or technological secrets, any details of organizations or business affairs, any names of past or present customers of the Company or its affiliates or any other information relating to the business or businesses or their affiliates.
During her first two weeks of employment, Williams worked 3.4 hours of overtime for which she was not compensated. Filing 92-31 at 71. Williams claims she discussed the non-payment of her overtime hours with Joscelyn who refused to pay her. Filing 92-31 at 72. Williams was eventually paid for the missed overtime wages in January 2017, nearly one year later, after making a complaint to HR. Filing 92-31 at 74.
After three months of employment, H&H provided Williams with a performance review. Filing 98-19 at 54. H&H ranked Williams at a five out of five ("Exceeds Expectations Always") in nine out of eleven categories. Filing 98-19 at 64. In the remaining two categories (efficiency and performance above and beyond her routine duties) Williams scored a four out of five. Filing 98-19 at 64. Following the positive three-month performance review, H&H gave Williams a raise to $19 per hour. Filing 92-31 at 38; Filing 92-7 at 2.
As 2016 progressed, however, the parties dispute the quality of Williams's work. Starting in November 2016, Williams was assigned part-time online sales work. Filing 92-31 at 18-19. Williams contends she was given the sales work because she was doing so well with the commodities program and H&H needed her additional help in sales. Filing 92-31 at 19-20. H&H, in turn, contends that Williams was given the opportunity to do online sales work in order to compensate for her poor performance and lack of effort as commodities broker. Filing 92-1 at 5.
The working relationship between Williams and H&H continued to deteriorate as 2016 neared its end. The parties agree that on December 21, 2016, Williams sent an email to H&H's outside human resources consultant, Doug Pedersen, listing several complaints against the company. Filing 92-1 at 8; Filing 98-10 at 1-2; Filing 92-27 at 2. At the time, the Malcoms were out of town. Filing 92-1 at 8. Williams's email stated she was "unhappy about a few things" and had "tried to let things pass and hope they would improve, however, they have not." Filing 98-10 at 1. Williams stated that she had originally applied for a sales position advertised at $50,000 salary plus commission but was told at the interview she was "too old" and offered the commodities-broker role instead. Filing 98-10 at 1. She claimed she had not been paid for approved overtime, had been criticized by Joscelyn who told her she was "overweight" for needing time off for medical reasons, and was not allowed alone in Zane's office because it made Joscelyn "too uncomfortable." Filing 98-10 at 2. Williams also complained about her pay, stating she was not yet being paid on a commission basis and only received a $300 annual bonus. Filing 98-10 at 2. Lastly, Williams stated she had spoken with other employees who were also dissatisfied with their pay arrangements. Filing 98-10 at 2.
On December 27, 2016, Williams sent a follow-up email to Pedersen. Filing 98-10 at 9-10. In it, she complained about inconsistencies in H&H's employee handbook and aspects of the policythat she thought H&H was not following. Filing 98-10 at 9-10. For example, Williams pointed out the handbook stated that part-time employees are those working thirty hours or less, but she was told if her hours dropped below thirty-eight per week, she would not eligible for certain full-time benefits. Filing 98-10 at 10. Finally, in an email dated December 29, Williams complained about being excluded from a pizza party celebrating the company's high sales numbers. Filing 98-10 at 5.
Pedersen first informed Zane and Joscelyn about Williams's complaints in an email dated December 28, 2016. Filing 98-13 at 2. He suggested he meet with the Malcoms upon their return to work and...
To continue reading
Request your trial