Opinion ID: 200072
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The October 18, 1998 Lack Of Credit

Text: 38 Bishop alleged that he did not receive credit for one of three jobs he performed on October 18, 1998. To receive credit, a SST must close out each job on an automated computer system. Bell Atlantic's trial evidence showed that the system shuts down in the evening to back up and compile the data, and that thereafter, SSTs cannot enter additional jobs. Bishop and another SST testified that in the past, they had received credit for work performed after 7:00 p.m. 39 The lack of credit for this job had only a de minimis impact on Bishop's overall work performance numbers, and no effect on his pay. Records for January through November, 1998, showed that Bishop completed 503 out of 571 combined assignments during the first eleven months of 1998, or 88.1% of his assigned jobs. Had he received credit for his third job on October 18, 1998, he would have had credit for 504 jobs, or 88.2%. 40 Given the absence of evidence of meaningful consequence to Bishop, we cannot conclude that he satisfied his prima facie burden to show that he experienced an adverse employment action. See Connell v. Bank of Boston, 924 F.2d 1169, 1179 (1st Cir.1991). The denial of credit simply did not alter a term or condition of employment. See Randlett v. Shalala, 118 F.3d 857, 862 (1st Cir.1997) (discussing which of employer's actions can give rise to adverse impact on employee with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment.). Work places are rarely idyllic retreats, and the mere fact that an employee is displeased by an employer's act or omission does not elevate that act or omission to the level of a materially adverse employment action. Blackie v. Maine, 75 F.3d 716, 725 (1st Cir.1996). To allow this claim to go to the jury was error.