Opinion ID: 2972814
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Post Assignments

Text: Vredevelt alleges that she and the other female employees working at the Facility were never assigned to the best post assignments. During her deposition, however, Vredevelt admitted that the desirability of the post positions was subjective. Specifically, she indicated that she particularly liked to work segregation but others did not because “it was the toughest to work.” Further, although Vredevelt claimed that the pod position was undesirable, one of her former coplaintiffs testified that she like working “a couple of the pods.” Vredevelt failed to demonstrate that her assignment to work certain post positions constituted an adverse employment action. As noted in Wilcoxon, in order for an employment -9- action to be adverse for purposes of a discrimination claim, “a plaintiff’s subjective impressions as to the desirability of one position over another [are] not controlling.” Wilcoxon, 597 N.W.2d at 258 (citing Kocsis v Multi-Care Mgmt., Inc., 97 F.3d 876, 886 (6th Cir. 1996)). The Collective Bargaining Agreement between GEO and the CO’s Union provides that GEO “shall have the right . . . to determine work schedules and type of work . . .” Moreover, as a CO, GEO could assign Vredevelt to any post. Certainly, GEO was not required to accommodate the post preferences of its employees. Thus, GEO’s assignment of Vredevelt to one post position instead of another cannot be deemed an adverse employment action.