Angela Ames v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co
747 F.3d 509, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 4694, 2014 WL 961020 (2014)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
To establish a claim for constructive discharge, an employee must show that the employer deliberately created intolerable working conditions with the intention of forcing the employee to quit, and that the employee gave the employer a reasonable opportunity to resolve the problem before resigning.
Facts:
- Angela Ames was a loss-mitigation specialist at Nationwide Mutual Insurance.
- During Ames's second pregnancy, her department head, Karla Neel, made negative comments about pregnancy complications, and her supervisor, Brian Brinks, made jokes about her taking too much maternity leave.
- Ames returned to work on July 19, 2010, two months after giving birth, and was physically uncomfortable due to her need to express breast milk.
- Upon her return, Ames learned she needed to complete paperwork and wait three days for access to a designated lactation room per company policy.
- A company nurse, Sara Hallberg, offered Ames the use of a temporary wellness room, but it was occupied; Hallberg told Ames to check back in 15-20 minutes.
- Brinks informed Ames that no work had been done in her absence, she had two weeks to catch up, she would need to work overtime, and she would be disciplined if she failed.
- Ames again asked Neel for help finding a place to lactate, but Neel refused.
- Neel then stated to Ames, "I think it’s best that you go home to be with your babies," and dictated a resignation statement for Ames to write and sign.
Procedural Posture:
- Angela Ames sued Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, Nationwide Advantage Mortgage Company, and Karla Neel in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, a federal trial court.
- Ames alleged sex and pregnancy discrimination under Title VII and the Iowa Civil Rights Act, claiming she was constructively discharged.
- Nationwide filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing there was no genuine dispute of material fact that Ames was constructively discharged.
- The district court granted Nationwide's motion for summary judgment.
- Ames, as the appellant, appealed the district court's grant of summary judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an employer's failure to provide immediate access to a lactation room, coupled with imposing a heavy workload on an employee's first day back from maternity leave, constitute constructive discharge when the employee resigns the same day without giving the employer a reasonable opportunity to remedy the situation?
Opinions:
Majority - Wollman, Circuit Judge.
No, the employer's actions did not constitute a constructive discharge. To prevail on a constructive discharge claim, an employee must prove both that the employer intentionally created intolerable working conditions to force a resignation and that the employee gave the employer a reasonable opportunity to remedy the problem. The court found that Nationwide's actions, such as applying a standard lactation policy to all employees and having a nurse attempt to find a temporary accommodation, did not demonstrate an intent to force Ames to quit. More critically, Ames failed the second prong of the test because she did not give Nationwide a reasonable opportunity to address her complaints; she resigned on her first morning back without following up on the temporary wellness room, contacting human resources, or pursuing other available channels to resolve the issue. An employee has an obligation not to 'jump to conclusions too fast' and must allow the employer a chance to ameliorate the problematic conditions before quitting.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the high threshold for proving constructive discharge claims under Title VII, particularly in the Eighth Circuit. It emphasizes that an employee has a duty to act reasonably by giving the employer a fair opportunity to remedy a difficult situation before resigning. The ruling suggests that a single bad day, even one involving multiple stressors related to pregnancy and maternity, is insufficient to meet the 'intolerable conditions' standard if the employee quits without exhausting reasonable avenues for redress within the company. This precedent makes it more difficult for plaintiffs who resign precipitously to succeed on a constructive discharge theory, underscoring the importance of documenting attempts to resolve workplace issues before leaving employment.
