she was verbal in physically harassed because she's a woman she endured hostile gender based name calling interference with their work and degrading sexualized physical conduct among other things and for the first four years of the conduct mass complaint constantly as she puts it in her that that happened i believe i don't know exactly but i think that was made in two thousand or two thousand and one i think that was closer in time to her written complaint in june of two thousand and one but i can't i can't tell you exactly when that day was i don't believe that she testified to that  problem having with the record as apparently was presented to the district court is that it appeared to be soon and boeing management was aware that ms miles had a problem  commission an investigation and they took very specific and very direct disciplinary action against two employees terminating one within a month or month and a half of her complaint and placing another one basically on administrative probation and with a warning that if it happened again he would be terminated what i'd like to know is what information did she supply that was just efficient to put management on that same level of characterization of that complaint in the results by boeing but not only that she complained constantly to one supervisor about noxious slander messing with her work please make it stop she complained to a second supervisor lloyd hat him prior to march of two thousand and one and there's a suggestion that it may have been as early as one thousand nine hundred eight but she did state that she complained to him about the the fact they were calling her names that they thought she was a bitch and that they were but again the point is that as i stated earlier this was recognized that you don't have to specify that sometimes especially when you state that the conduct is pervasive and that's exactly what miles is saying which is can't complain constantly of this conduct she's telling them that it's happening constantly day in and day out for four years prior to your written complaint now getting to her written complaint she complains about a number of things going resolves two of them but not really only one at least that's the evidence the commission presented in summary judgment counseling was because he went talented to another employer that she gives a good blow job and that's why she's getting away with things after the counseling he continues to call her a bitch he continues to harass her in the ways that have been done before and that she go back to anything about your charge we're not going to hear any ongoing future complaints that's the version of the evidence the commission presented boeing has a different version on summary judgment this should have been ruled on and based on the commission's evidence and again that clearly fails to meet this court standard that the employer has to act with reasonable care in responding to complaints of discrimination but again from that point on the harassment continued with with blowing with another of individuals company any other action  with the again i apologize for giving you a lot of information this is a long time line with a lot of events but my understanding of the record is that the only thing that mr nunn maker did in response to miles was compliance was well there were a few things that he did one he said in a couple occasions were going on with complaints about her tool box being interfere with that he talked to the guys of course the context continued after he talked to the guys we don't know what the content is of that but it clearly didn't stop the harassment or prevent future harassment against another makers also someone who called her a troublemaker and other names in response or complaints hatter did nothing in the written complaint going to get into to get and i should i should mention there is a third component to the written complaint as far as attempt a remedial response that is they investigated the contention that john bird had been taking miles as tools and that that was part of the harassment always conclusion the tools aren't yours so it's not a problem of course if there is something that you heard from someone else that might be hearsay but if that person can testify to the point that could be presented at trial and therefore we don't have a hearsay proffer summary judgment but yes yes yes we are evidence is that miles had complained for an extended period of time about people messing with their tools interfering with their work she complained of not to make or she complained to hatter she complained in writing finally and she identified though is the person who is responsible for the toolbox and during the period question that person was miles ok but with others be impacted if the tool box with masks that others may or may not have there's no evidence the point put in the record but others were impacted but there's plenty of evidence put in the record by the commission's plaintiffs that miles was impacted by that it disrupted her work performance she between the tools for the fasteners or whatnot there's also plenty of evidence that all of this was based on sex not only from the comments that we've heard about that were direct like this you know this but you take it all together and she has experience and the definition of a hostile environment she feels intimidated each and every day absolutely you know that she's in distress to each and every day to the point that she is affected in her work that she had made this complaint the response was as she testified she was told the event you've gone to the e e o c now they're your advocate we're not going to talk about your charge and we're not going to take further complaints from you now the authority that boeing relied on the district court the issues that i think was the court was alluding to in addressing mr tucker is one of the main issues that no one is presented throughout this case and that it's the issue of whether evidence that but we're still discussing the same thing and would you agree with me that you got upset over this and handle it wrong and they used yes and you also said that john went to kevin and he came out screaming his neck or if you asked what you mean by screaming answer hypothetical there is a hostile work environment here and if it makes her doing her job harder it doesn't matter one of the two walks belongs to or not if she can show but i'm reading from the deposition testimony i'm now on page one seventy one and so you are coming to question has it ever been trashed like that since no has it overall argument that i mean as i'm as i'm calling states when you're looking at a hostile work environment you have to consider the context in which these acts are occurring this was a manufacturing floor people i mean it was busy it's a busy manufacturing floor people are working on many different things it's a big hangar so the one incident where it will be clear it was it was fairly clear or at least work in secret purposes of summary judgment go by do you know if they have an empty coffee cup they would put the coffee cup on it but they would do that with everybody she testifies it's been told will track well and you know for speculation but here we are on summary judgment she's got lots of evidence of more mistrust still of the toward her by some of her fellow coworkers based on her gender and to say that is pure speculation that this toolbox that she about you know things like that although we can see that in the title seven plaintiffs does not have to use any magic words thank sexual harassment she has to do more than that i mean she i don't know how herder that the guys thought she was a bitch and somehow he was supposed to know that she meant that they had been calling her a bitch well why didn't she say that if they had indeed been referring to her as that that should have been her without any support whatsoever and she wasn't even complaining that there was any conduct to be addressed so i mean in terms of when when she put boeing on notice that there was something that ro receive is because you're one i think you and i read the statute in exactly the same way i what i like i mean we've never studied that ms miles did not and she clearly did not have the perfect working relationship with some of her coworkers we will c things miles went to h r several times and complained about things so the fact that she was there were things that were happening she didn't complain about there was no way for boeing to be on notice of that and especially given that she they believe that she was comfortable coming to human resources there was no reason for them to think that there was something that she was not telling them because she had told them things but i do think you just think it's because there are so many factual allegations in the papers i think it's just to kind of finish up it's important to keep in mind the standard of liability under title seven per company and the conduct of the studio here i mean what the e e o c is essentially trying to do is take there was all this conduct over don't think that there's evidence even for purposes of summary judgment which we concede you have to look at the evidence most favorable the plaintiffs there's a not enough evidence to get reasonable jury to find the boeing knew that she was subject to based program students and didn't do anything to resolve it when they learned about the complaints they took action they didn't immediately terminate everyone but under six months and that's clearly not what they required to do they're just required to take appropriate remedial action and just one point on that mr tucker start that after miles complained about mr blauser conduct and he was reprimanded that he continued t conduct he may have but the record is clear that she never she never told anybody at boeing that he continued that conduct so once again she's trying to use trying to hold liable for blowing only once on may two thousand and one and then side of the deposition pages that we've actually been focusing on yes that is not her testimony her testimony is that was trashed like that only once she testifies immediately after that that track that it was filled with trash i won't go over other things in the very but i much appreciate everything that recounts accurately what's in