 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Cook v. State8/31/1999
Idaho Falls, May 1999 Term
1999 Opinion No. 102
Frederick C. Lyon, Clerk
Appeal from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, State of Idaho, Bonneville County. Hon. Marvin Smith and Hon. Richard T. St. Clair, District Judges.
The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
This is an employment discrimination case. The appellant terminated her employment after bein g turned down for a promotion. She claimed that she was discriminated against because the senior technicia n promotion she sought was closed when she was the only woman who applied. Appellant was denied relie f by a grievance panel of appellant's employer, the Idaho Human Rights Commission and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. After a jury trial again denied appellant relief, she filed an appea l with this Court. We affirm the decision of the district court.
I.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
After obtaining an Associates Degree, Cathy Cook was hired by the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) in May of 1988 as an apprentice technician in Idaho Falls. Cook was assigned to District Six with offices in Rigby and Idaho Falls. Defendant Devin Rigby was the resident engineer for Idaho Falls and Defendant Jim Ross was the resident engineer for the Rigby office. After six months in the Idaho Falls office, Cook was promoted to a transportation technician.
At trial, Cook testified that her second assignment was with a crew from District Five surveying the Blackfoot interchange. During this survey she noticed the crew was not following procedure. When she reported the problem to her supervisor, she testified that she was told to work on getting along with others. During this project she noticed other discrepancies which she did not report.
In July of 1991, two positions came open for senior technicians, one in Rigby and the other in Idaho Falls. Cook applied for each position but was turned down for both. A male employee was promoted to the Rigby position and the Idaho Falls position was not filled. When Cook inquired as to the closing of the position, she was told that the Idaho Falls register did not have enough applicants.
Her supervisor, Rigby, told her the reasons why she was not promoted and suggested it might help if she "use the fact that she was a woman at the next interview." Rigby also informed Cook that he thought she had a bad attitude. Cook reported the conversation and Rigby was given a written reprimand for his comments.
On July 25, 1991, Cook filed a grievance with ITD concerning the decision not to fill the Idaho Falls position. The grievance resulted in meetings between Ross, Rigby and Cook. The grievance process culminated in a decision by a three-person panel which concluded that the panel could not resolve the issue. The panel decided that it was within the ITD management's prerogative whether or not to fill the position, and that Cook and her superiors should work on their communications.
On October 31, 1991, Cook filed a complaint with the Idaho Human Rights Commission (IHRC) and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). In her complaint Cook asserted that she had been discriminated against based on her sex when " espondent closed the promotion offering and said that the position would not be filled." On April 3, 1992, Cook amended her EEOC complaint to add a claim of "retaliation," which she believed resulted from bringing her discrimination claim. On August 17, 1992, the IHRC concluded that no discrimination based on sex had occurred and dismissed the complaint. On September 25, 1992, the EEOC adopted the IHRC's findings and l
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Idaho Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|