We represent victims of reverse discrimination and anti-DEI whistleblowers

No one should be victimized by sexual harassment on the job. Despite major scandals and legal decisions involving workplace supervisors who pressured employees into giving them sexual attention, this type of misconduct continues. Even worse, many workers who seek to stop the harassment find themselves victimized again by retaliatory tactics that sometimes go as far as termination. 

According to a lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against C&M Defense Group LLC and Global Security Management Team LLC, employee Marilyn LeGree was a victim of both sexual harassment and unlawful retaliation. While working as a security guard, LeGree’s direct supervisor made multiple advances to her using explicit language, even after she said she was not interested in any type of a personal relationship with him. 

Part of the reason LeGree took the job as shopping mall security officer was because the shift started at 5 p.m., which allowed her to look after child during the daytime hours. Almost immediately after she took the position, LeGree’s supervisor began telling her what he would do if he had sex with her, and that he wanted to “groom” her. Additionally, the supervisor sent text messages expressing his desire for her in graphic detail. Co-workers informed LeGree that the boss was also following her Instagram feed and spreading rumors about her in the workplace.

Desperate to alleviate the situation, LeGree sent copies of the text messages to her field support manager, who brought the company’s CEO into the conversation. LeGree said she no longer wanted to work with that supervisor. Part of her worry stemmed from the fact that he had driven her home and knew where she lived. 

A few days after the discussion, LeGree was assigned to a new location. While this security job was away from the supervisor who had hounded her, the shift started at 1 p.m., which was not manageable due to her parenting responsibilities. However, no change was made, and LeGree was fired a few days later. 

Along with sexual harassment, Title VII also forbids retaliation against employees for reporting harassment or participating in an investigation. A close temporal proximity between a complaint and an adverse action can support an inference of causation. Here, the EEOC points to the roughly six-day interval between LeGree’s complaint and her termination as evidence of a connection. The fact that no apparent action was taken against the supervisor, while she was moved to a shift that didn’t fit her schedule, also supports her case. 

Kardell Law Group provides strong legal representation for victims of sexual harassment, retaliation and other forms of workplace misconduct. Don’t wait to speak with one of our experienced attorneys if your employment rights were violated.