Untimely, Non-Gender Based Conduct Did Not Amount to a Hostile Work Environment Claim, Court Holds

In McIntyre v. Corning Incorporated, 15-cv-6277, 2019 WL 2140625 (W.D.N.Y., 2019), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s Title VII hostile work environment claim, finding that plaintiff did not show that he was subjected to a hostile work environment within 300 days of his EEOC complaint.

In this case, plaintiff alleged (inter alia) that he was subjected to mooning, shoulder rubs, and derogatory name-calling (“fag”).

En route to finding that plaintiff “has not shown that he was subjected to a hostile work environment within 300 days of his … EEOC complaint”, the court cited the plaintiff’s deposition testimony.

For example:[1]Objections have been edited out.

Q. Do you think he did this [referring to the mooning] because you were a male?

A. No.

Q. So you don’t think your gender had anything to do with it, correct?

A. I think it was — I think he had a problem with me. I don’t think it was the fact that I am a male or a female.…

Q. But you don’t have any reason to believe he was making a sexual advance toward you?

A. Not — not at that time.…

Q. So your testimony is — today is you don’t specifically recall any incident after this incident was reported in which John Walter harassed you, correct?

A. Correct.

As to the shoulder rubbing, in response to the question whether plaintiff “ha[s] any reason to believe he was doing this because of your gender as a male,” plaintiff responded “No.”

   [ + ]

1. Objections have been edited out.