In Hayes v. Clariant Plastics & Coatings USA (6th Cir., No. 24-1336, 07/18/2025), the plaintiff was terminated as part of a reduction in force. She sued, alleging age and sex discrimination, and hostile work environment. The district court granted summary judgment for the employer, although the Sixth Circuit reversed on the gender discrimination claim in order to determine whether the employer was motivated by her inferior skills or her gender. The court held that a jury could find that she was treated less favorably than the similarly situated male employee. Although there was not an “exact correlation”, the male employee performed similar job duties, reported to the same boss, and was subject to the same performance standards. The court found her age discrimination claim failed because she was not replaced by someone outside her protected class or treated less favorably than a similarly situated employee outside her protected class. Additionally, while there was evidence of a climate of pervasive sexual harassment, and that management knew about some of the alleged sexual harassment, her hostile work environment claim is time-barred.
Sixth Circuit Finds Sufficient Comparator Evidence – Reverses on Gender Discrimination Claim
