A former police department custodian accused a senior officer of sexual harassment and alleged that another supervisor later grabbed her, told her never to talk about her complaint again, threatened to “get her” if she did, and said he would “come after” and “get” any coworkers she’d told about her complaint if they spoke up about it.
Asked if this would constitute unlawful retaliation, a unanimous Iowa Supreme Court has decided it wouldn’t.
The decision, issued Friday, June 6, marks the end of Valerie Rheeder’s lawsuit against her former employer, the Marion Police Department. The court reversed the ruling of a district judge who had decided the case could proceed to trial, and sent it back to be dismissed.
Rheeder filed claims against three officials: Deputy Police Chief Douglas Slagle, whom she accused of harassment; Police Chief Joseph McHale, who ordered her and Slagle to avoid contact after her initial complaint; and administrative manager Shellene Gray, who she accused of subsequently threatening her.
Attorneys for Rheeder and Slagle did not respond to messages seeking comment. They, McHale and Gray have since left their employment with the city.
Deputy Chief’s messages to custodian lead to harassment complaint
Iowa Supreme Court Justice David May.
According to court filings, Rheeder began working for the city in 2018, and within months, Slagle began texting her and, she alleged, finding opportunities to touch or be close to her. In early 2019, he allegedly told her he’d been thinking too much about her and made comments about “what I want to do with you.” Text messages included in Friday’s opinion show him pressing to talk with her amid flirtatious texts about her being “bad.”
Rheeder said in the suit that she told him his actions made her uncomfortable, and Slagle apologized and told her his interest was not in a sexual relationship but a platonic friendship. Despite this, she said, the following week Slagle touched her in a way that made her feel uncomfortable. Several days later, she filed a harassment complaint with the city.
In the ensuing investigation, McHale found that Slagle’s actions did not amount to sexual harassment, and directed both parties not to have any further contact with each other.
Reviewing Slagle’s actions, Justice David May wrote for the court that the deputy chief had not, as alleged, created a hostile work environment for Rheeder.
“While some of Slagle’s conduct would be offensive, it involved no physical threats or humiliations. … In short, when we view Slagle’s conduct from the objective reasonable-person perspective, it was not sufficiently severe or pervasive as to’amount to an alteration of the terms or conditions of employment’ for Rheeder,” he wrote.
Previously: Court dismisses suit against Des Moines Water Works, finds no evidence of discrimination
And while Rheeder complained McHale’s direction not to talk to Slagle amounted to retaliation, May found that it was meant to “protect both parties” and did not impose any adverse consequences on Rheeder.
Attorneys for McHale and the city said the court’s decision affirmed the city took the appropriate steps when it learned of Rheeder’s allegations in 2019.
“In reviewing the facts of the case, the Iowa Supreme Court found that the City had complied with the Iowa Civil Rights Act,” attorney Holly Corkery said in an emailed statement. “The City remains committed to adhering to all applicable employment policies and laws, and to fostering a positive work environment for its employees.”
Manager threatened to ‘get you’ — not retaliation, court rules
Rheeder also filed retaliation claims against Gray, who managed her direct supervisor. In a separate complaint, she alleged that days after she filed her first complaint, Gray grabbed her shoulders, said Rheeder should have talked to her first, and told her she would “get her” if she ever talked about the complaint again. Rheeder alleged Gray later made further threats against coworkers to whom Rheeder had spoken about her complaint, and conducted herself in the office in ways Rheeder found intimidating.
Rheeder in her suit said she eventually took leave and chose not to return to work in light of Gray’s alleged conduct.
More: Trump stopped workplace discrimination cases. What happens to payments for Iowa victims?
Gray’s actions also would not amount to retaliation under Iowa law, May wrote.
“We accept as true Rheeder’s assertion that Gray’s conduct caused her fear and other symptoms and caused her to miss work,” he wrote. Nonetheless, “Gray did not physically injure Rheeder (or) harm Rheeder’s property. … Indeed, Gray’s threats were so vague that we cannot say that they were even threats of something that would be objectivelyinjurious or harmful.”
Because of the stage at which the case was dismissed, the Supreme Court treated Rheeder’s allegations against Gray as true. Gray’s attorneys, though, say she “vehemently disagrees with Ms. Rheeder’s version of events.”
“Notwithstanding, we are extremely pleased with the Iowa Supreme Court’s opinion and believe the court reached the right result,” attorney Maggie Hanson said in an emailed statement.
William Morris covers courts for the Des Moines Register. He can be contacted at wrmorris2@registermedia.com or 715-573-8166.
This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: Iowa Supreme Court rules for Marion police in harassment lawsuit