Opinion ID: 2981236
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Proposed Comparators

Text: Ms. Collins’s sex discrimination claim made reference to two male co-workers who allegedly engaged in similar conduct. The first of these employees was Clarence Hampton. Ms. Collins and a janitor each complained that Hampton had cursed on the job. Walker testified that Hampton was not disciplined as a result of Ms. Collins’s complaint because the complaint could not be corroborated. However, the janitor’s complaint was corroborated, and Hampton was suspended for three days as a result. Walker testified that one corroborated incident of cursing did not rise to the level of terminable conduct. The second comparator that Ms. Collins proposed was Robert Shaw, another supervisor. The record reveals that three employees raised complaints about Shaw. During King’s investigation, a blind employee said: “Robert [Shaw] has been telling me that I can’t see. He tells me that I am blind and I know I can’t see, but I don’t need him to tell me this.”31 Two other employees indicated that Shaw had hollered or yelled at them.32 In his report, King noted these incidents and concluded that Shaw “has created or is in the process[] of creating a hostile work environment for at least three employees.”33 He recommended: “At a minimum, counsel Robert Shaw on appropriate interaction 31 R.25-6 at 2 (King Report). 32 One of these two employees also had made her concerns known to Walker, who did not discipline Shaw at the time because there was “[n]o proof . . . except for her making the allegation.” R.25-2 at 43 (Walker Dep. 112). 33 R.25-6 at 12 (King Report). -9- No. 11-5635 Collins v. Memphis Goodwill Industries, Inc. with disabled employees and the proper methods of communicating with employees.”34 Ms. Collins has put forward no evidence as to whether Martini followed this recommendation.