The opinion of the court was delivered by: Robert L. Carter, District Judge.
Morning production meetings were held daily. It was Tunis'
job to identify quality defects in the tubing where the glass
was being formed and to give her findings at the morning
meetings as to the cause of the flaws she discovered. To
accomplish this assignment Tunis had to mark the defects, take
samples and examine them under a microscope in an attempt to
determine the cause of the problem. During her training period
she performed these tasks under the supervision of Dennis
Kauser, her immediate supervisor. After completion of her
training in May, she was expected from June onward to perform
the defect analysis function on her own.
The morning meetings focused around correcting the problems
which had been found. From time to time, after her training
period ended, Tunis was not prepared to give a full report
about all the defects in the tubing. On occasion she was
unprepared to give an analysis of the defects she had found,
or she had not completed the required investigation of the
contents of all the operating tubing.
On or about April 15, Tunis complained to Charles Francik,
plant manager, about photographs of naked or nearly naked
women in sexually suggestive poses displayed on the walls
along the passage-way she used in going to the glass
laboratory and mix house. She told Francik that she had
discussed the matter with Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission ("EEOC") officials and had been assured that such
displays were in violation of the law banning sex
discrimination in the work-place. Francik advised Tunis that
public displays of the sort she described were at odds with
company policy and that he would have the photographs removed.
Francik then made an immediate tour of the area Tunis would
walk through, and the next morning he went through the entire
plant. He found pinup photographs in the mix house, on the
door of the paint shop and in the teaser shanty — the trades
area where employees involved in maintenance and construction
worked. Francik ordered Carlo Merletti, department head of the
trades area, to remove the material and to make a tour of the
area to look for any such material he might have missed.
On or about April 23, Tunis again complained that offensive
photographs were still on display. Francik sent Merletti to
look for the display, but Merletti reported he could find
nothing. Francik then had Merletti accompany Tunis to locate
the material. It turned out to be a postcard on the inside
cover of the tool box of one of the maintenance employees. It
was ordered removed. Thereafter, Tunis made no further
complaints to Francik about any pinup displays.
Going with Merletti to locate the postcard exposed Tunis as
the individual who caused the removal of the photographs.
Thereafter, on trips to the glass laboratory and mix house,
she was greeted with whistles, catcalls and grunts. On one
occasion two hourly employees remarked in her presence in
sufficient volume for her to hear that she was okay but they
could not tell about her legs because she always wore pants.
She told them "to fuck off."
When Tunis complained to Francik about being whistled at in
the trades area, he personally went to the area to speak to
the union representative and several other supervisors and
employees he regarded as influential. He explained to them
that he did not want such activity to continue, that it was
inappropriate, that he specifically disapproved of such
conduct, and he asked for their cooperation in having it
stopped. He heard no further complaints from Tunis about being
Tunis also complained to Jack Stumpf, plant manufacturing
engineer and the immediate supervisor of Kauser, who was
Tunis' immediate superior, about the whistling. Stumpf spoke
to the union steward of the trades group and asked him to
speak to the group and indicate that such conduct was
inappropriate. He asked the steward to identify anyone he knew
who might be
doing the whistling so that Stumpf could speak to them
Tunis complained subsequently that she was still being
whistled at. Stumpf convened a meeting in his office with
Tunis, Merletti and Art Mayo, the union committeeman. Tunis
told them about the catcalls and whistles, and Stumpf
indicated that such conduct was unprofessional and
inappropriate in a business climate. Tunis stated that those
responsible should be discharged. She could not, however, name
the culprits and did not identify them by description. Her
proposed solution led to protracted discussion with the union
representative about what steps the union required in
disciplining employees. There was an unwillingness to go to
the extreme of terminating the offenders. Nothing concrete
seems to have come out of this meeting, but Stumpf received no
further complaints from Tunis on this subject.
Tunis was very much concerned about the use of gender based
job titles, language and terminology. She would constantly
interrupt people, whether she was a participant in the
conversation or not, to correct their usage if gender based
language or terminology was used. Steve Clair, the melting
department head, and Jean Gauthier, the forming department
head, complained that when they would try to explain something
to Tunis she would interrupt to correct their speech. At one
of the morning meetings a senior process engineer had been
asked to attend to make a presentation. Tunis kept
interrupting him to correct him when he would say such things
as tank man or cullet man. He became so upset that he walked
out of the meeting. Gauthier also testified that Tunis
prolonged the morning meetings by rudely correcting people's
Gauthier was awakened in the early morning hours on two
consecutive occasions because the log book which he used to
communicate with his shift supervisors was not legible. Gender
based words had been crossed out along with other words, so
that what had been written made no sense. Later on he came
upon Tunis in the act of crossing out words in the log book.
She was told by Kauser not to do that again, and there was no
repetition of log book tampering.
On March 24, 1976, before Tunis commenced her tour of duty
at Fall Brook, a memorandum had been sent to company
supervisory personnel changing salaried position titles to
eliminate their gender based orientation. Shift foreman, for
example, was changed to shift supervisor, section foreman to
section supervisor, draftsman to drafting technician, etc.
When Tunis complained about the continued use of sex based
terminology, Francik had a new memorandum, dated May 13, 1976,
sent to all personnel reiterating company policy that sex
based terminology was no longer appropriate.
Tunis testified that, after she had become known as the
cause of the removal of the pinup displays, she was often kept
locked in the outer area when she sought entry into the plant
in the morning. One had to be let into the plant by security
personnel, who would buzz you in on the showing of proper
identification. After showing the proper identification,
however, she would still be denied access to the plant until
other employees arrived, when she then would pass through with
them. Francik testified that the security people on duty would
become distracted by a phone call or some other matter and
would at times forget to buzz him in promptly.
The work day was 8-5. Tunis arrived at about 8:10-8:15 and
worked until 6 or later. In the beginning she arrived at 8,
but was locked out and then she began arriving at 8:15 or
8:20. Because of some construction which blocked access to her
office, arriving at 8 was a problem for about 6 weeks, but ...