Discrimination "because of ... sex" under FEHA
Plaintiff John Singleton was hired in February 2002. He was suspended and ultimately terminated on December 27, 2002 for making a comment about bringing a gun to work and shooting people if he had to work on Christmas. The plaintiff sued, claiming that his coworkers had repeatedly taunted him with sexually themed comments, and that these comments constituted harassment "because of ... sex." He claimed he also made frequent verbal complaints to his supervisors, but was always told to just ignore the taunts.
The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant employer on the plaintiff's FEHA-based claims, but the appeals court reversed, finding that plaintiff had raised genuine issues of material fact regarding whether he was sexually harassed, whether he reported the harassment to his supervisors, and whether action was taken to correct and eliminate the harassment. The court reasoned that the plaintiff's testimony about his coworkers' graphically sexual comments to him would, if believed, show that he experienced a hostile environment "because of [his] sex." Because the coworkers' comments would "challenge [him] as a man," thus attacking plaintiff's heterosexual identity, they constituted discrimination "because of ... sex." Singleton v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 2006 DJDAR 8758 (2d Dist., Div. 8, July 3, 2006).