Coleman v. Schneider Electric USA, Inc. (Lawyers Weekly No. 002-031-18, 19 pp.) (Henry Herlong Jr., S.J.) 8:15-cv-02466; D.S.C.
Holding: Company records said the requisition for a position was cancelled because of an “internal promotion to strategize and reduce base costs.” In fact, someone of the same level took over the position’s responsibilities, at first temporarily, and then permanently, but he did not receive a pay increase. No candidates were interviewed for the position. These facts do not raise an inference of race and/or sex discrimination.
The court agrees with the magistrate judge’s recommendation and grants summary judgment for the defendant-employer.
Even though plaintiff’s own supervisor had no issue with her communication skills and put her in charge of training other employees, the training job she sought as a promotion would have been supervised by a different supervisor, and he determined that plaintiff’s poor communication skills would not work well in a training role. The employer is entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff’s claim that the employer violated Title VII when it failed to promote her to the trainer position.
Plaintiff received a positive performance review after she filed two discrimination charges, and six months passed between the filing of her charges and her first “competent” (as opposed to her usual “above average”) performance rating and defendant’s proposal of a development plan. Plaintiff has not shown that the “competent” performance rating or the development plan was in retaliation for her discrimination charges.