Heather Spagnolia sued Charter Communications, LLC in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado, alleging pregnancy discrimination, gender discrimination, failure to accommodate, retaliation, and termination in violation of public policy under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA). The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Charter on all claims, and Spagnolia appealed the retaliation claim to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Factual Overview
Spagnolia, employed by Charter since 2016, requested lactation accommodations upon returning from maternity leave in July 2019. After several unsatisfactory arrangements, Charter changed its policy on August 22, 2019, requiring Spagnolia to “clock out” for lactation breaks. The following day, Spagnolia surreptitiously recorded a meeting with her supervisor about the policy change. Charter discovered the recording and terminated Spagnolia on August 29 for violating its policies prohibiting surreptitious recordings.
Legal Analysis
Retaliation Claim: The Tenth Circuit applied the Title VII McDonnell-Douglas burden-shifting framework to Spagnolia’s CADA retaliation claim. While assuming that Spagnolia established a prima facie case, the court found that Charter offered a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for her termination—violation of its policy against surreptitious recordings. Spagnolia failed to demonstrate that this reason was pretextual.
The court rejected Spagnolia’s arguments that Charter’s explanation was implausible because (1) Charter had a policy against firing employees for a first recording offense, (2) Charter did not dismiss another employee who had recorded a coworker, and (3) Charter had no formal policy forbidding recording coworkers. The court found that the record did not support these contentions and that Spagnolia had not shown that Charter’s stated basis for dismissal was pretextual.
The Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Charter on Spagnolia’s retaliation claim and denied her motion to certify questions of law to the Colorado Supreme Court.
Schrag on Law 