Opinion ID: 152981
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Objective & Subjective Hostility

Text: We turn now to whether a rational juror could find that the gender-based conduct in question was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim's employment and create an abusive working environment. Harris, 510 U.S. at 21, 114 S.Ct. 367 (internal quotation marks omitted). The relevant inquiry focuses on both objective and subjective hostility: A work environment will be considered hostile if a reasonable person would have found it to be so and if the plaintiff subjectively so perceived it. Brennan v. Metro. Opera Ass'n, 192 F.3d 310, 318 (2d Cir.1999). Relevant circumstances include: the frequency of the discriminatory conduct; its severity; whether it is physically threatening or humiliating, or a mere offensive utterance; and whether it unreasonably interferes with an employee's work performance. Harris, 510 U.S. at 23, 114 S.Ct. 367. In establishing this element, a plaintiff need not show that her hostile working environment was both severe and pervasive; only that it was sufficiently severe or sufficiently pervasive, or a sufficient combination of these elements, to have altered her working conditions. See Terry v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 128, 148-49 (2d Cir.2003); see also Brennan, 192 F.3d at 318 ([A] plaintiff must still prove that the incidents were `sufficiently continuous and concerted' to be considered pervasive, or that a single episode is `severe enough' to establish a hostile working environment.) (internal citation omitted). And again, in addressing this question, we consider the totality of circumstances. See Terry, 336 F.3d at 148-49. The district court concluded that the challenged conduct amounted to nothing more than minor annoyances and inconveniences. Verizon once again argues that the record is simply too conclusory and lacking in concrete particulars to avoid summary judgment on the question of objective hostility. In particular, it argues that Pucino cannot establish the frequency of the abuse simply by stating in her affidavit that the alleged abuse occurred constantly or frequently. We disagree. We believe that a trier might easily find that the harassment and abuse was sufficiently severe to alter Pucino's working conditions. Work assignments, the provision of tools, the use of a bucket truck, the issues as to use of restrooms, and the verbal abuse affected most of the major aspects of Pucino's employment. With regard to the conclusions of Pucino's evidence as to the frequency of the abuse, a plaintiff, to prevail, need not recount each and every instance of abuse to show pervasiveness. In Torres v. Pisano, 116 F.3d 625 (2d Cir.1997), a plaintiff testified that a supervisor constantly harassed herso often that she `lost count' but that she could recall the exact dates and circumstances of only a few incidents of harassment. Id. at 631. In discussing the district court's grant of summary judgment, we explained that If a jury were to credit [the plaintiff's] general allegations of constant abuse, which were confirmed by her coworkers, it could reasonably find pervasive harassment, even in the absence of specific details about each incident. Id.; see also Holtz v. Rockefeller & Co., 258 F.3d 62, 75 (2d Cir.2001) (crediting testimony in support of a hostile work environment claim that plaintiff was constantly or daily made the victim of wanted physical contact); Brennan, 192 F.3d at 318 (explaining that [a] plaintiff need not present a list of specific acts). Pucino's evidence fits within the Torres precedent. She has described the nature of the alleged abuse in some detail. Although she omitted specifics as to the date and circumstances of each instance of abuse, her testimony was corroborated by other witnesses, including Dauer, Burton, and Irvin. We thus conclude that Pucino's evidence was sufficient to allow a trier to find pervasiveness. Accordingly, we hold that a rational juror could find the treatment of Pucino to be sufficiently severe or sufficiently pervasive to alter the conditions of her employment.