Eeoc v. the Boeing Company

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 18, 200907-16903California4,083 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

The following recitation of the facts reflects the nonmoving party’s factual submissions, which we credit for purposes of summary judgment. See Vasquez v. County of Los Angeles, 349 F.3d 634, 639-40 (9th Cir. 2003).

Antonia Castron

Castron, after working for Boeing sporadically for several years, joined its Electrical Engineering Department as a liai- son engineer in 1997. From 1998 until her termination in 2003, Castron worked under department manager Bill Charl- ton (“Charlton”), who reviewed the performance evaluations given by supervisors to liaison engineers. 11242 EEOC v. THE BOEING COMPANY According to the deposition testimony of Boeing employee Glen Foster (“Foster”), Charlton had frequently made nega- tive comments about women, including comments to the effect that Charlton “didn’t want any more women and that women were not worth a shit,” that “he didn’t have good luck with females and they hadn’t been around long enough for his satisfaction,” that he “just didn’t have time” to train women, and that Charlton’s ex-wife, who was a Boeing employee, “should be at home, not working.” According to Foster, Char- lton, in the context of discussing a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.