Plaintiff Maria Woods sued defendant Edelman Financial Engines, LLC in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas raising claims of sex- and race-based discrimination, hostile work environment, retaliation, and constructive discharge under Title VII and § 1981. Before the court is Defendant Edelman Financial Engines, LLC’s motion for summary judgment.
Statement of Undisputed Facts
Maria Woods, a Hispanic female, worked for Edelman Financial Engines, LLC from 2016 to 2022. She started as an Executive Administrative Assistant and was promoted multiple times, eventually becoming a Senior Program Manager with a salary of $120,000 plus bonus eligibility. Throughout her employment, Woods received positive performance reviews and consistent pay increases.
Woods raised concerns about her compensation several times, comparing her salary to those of white male colleagues, particularly Brian Orme and Nick Robbie. She also expressed frustration when she was not promoted to a director-level position and when her request for a lateral transfer was initially not supported by a company executive.
Woods resigned in September 2022 after accepting a job offer from another company. She claims her resignation was a constructive discharge due to discriminatory treatment.
Edelman Financial Engines provided explanations for the pay disparities, citing factors such as experience, education, and geography. The company also clarified that Woods’ transfer request was ultimately not denied, and she was encouraged to apply for any position she desired.
Legal Analysis
Wage Discrimination: The court found that while Woods established a prima facie case of wage discrimination, Edelman Financial Engines provided legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for the pay disparities. Woods failed to show that these reasons were pretextual.
Failure to Promote or Transfer: The court determined that Woods did not establish a prima facie case for her failure-to-promote claim, as she did not provide evidence of the qualifications for the director position she sought. Regarding the transfer request, the court found that no adverse employment action was taken against Woods.
Hostile Work Environment: The court rejected Woods’ attempt to reframe her wage discrimination claim as a hostile work environment claim, finding no evidence of severe or pervasive discriminatory conduct that altered her working conditions.
Retaliation: The court concluded that Woods did not engage in protected opposition to discrimination, as her complaints about pay did not sufficiently connect her concerns to her sex or race.
Constructive Discharge: The court found that Woods failed to show that her working conditions were so intolerable that a reasonable person would have felt compelled to resign.
The court granted Edelman Financial Engines’ motion for summary judgment on all of Woods’ claims.
Schrag on Law 