Defendant's Attorney: Carolyn A. Davis and Gary Everett Thomas

Description: Columbus, Ohio employment lawyer represented Plaintiff, who sued Defendant on a wrongful termination theory.


In February 2018, Ms. Shivers was promoted to the position of Credit Service Associate (“CSA”) at Charter. (ECF No. 25-1, ¶ ¶ 4-6.) CSAs worked with customers on collections, payment exceptions, and refunds. (ECF No. 25-2, ¶ 7.) They “primarily performed two tasks: (i) balance transfers[ ] and (ii) payment research, ” with the latter making up the majority of the work. Id. Upon her promotion, Charter provided training in both areas. Id. at ¶ 8. Joshua Bliss supervised Ms. Shivers. (ECF No. 25-2, ¶ ¶ 3, 5.)

Each time a customer called with a payment concern a “ticket” was created. Id. at ¶ 6. Charter partly measured the effectiveness of CSAs based on the percentage of successfully resolved tickets, with 90-95% resolution being the minimum goal. Id. at ¶ 9. Ms. Shivers failed to meet that minimum in April, May, June, July, September, October, and November 2018. Id. at ¶ 10.

In June 2018, Ms. Shivers complained to Joanne Gorte (Mr. Bliss's manager) that she did not receive the same training that Sarah Weaver, a younger Caucasian CSA, did. Id. at PageID 430-33; ECF No. 30, PageID 847-48. Ms. Shivers avers that Ms. Weaver received between five and ten days of training while Ms. Shivers received only one and a half days of training. (ECF No. 28-1, ¶ ¶ 6-7.) Ms. Shivers also had to wait for one month to obtain a computer while Ms. Weaver enjoyed immediate computer access. Id. at ¶ 8.

Mr. Bliss counseled Ms. Shivers on how to improve her ticket resolution in August and September 2018. (ECF No. 25-3, PageID 406, 550-51). Mr. Bliss also arranged for Kelly Dawson, another CSA, to provide three additional days of training to Ms. Shivers in September 2018. Id. at PageID 408-410, 547. Two months later, Mr. Bliss shared his performance and attendance concerns with Ms. Shivers. (ECF No. 25-2, PageID 548-552.)


On December 12, 2018, Mr. Bliss notified Ms. Shivers that Charter was placing her on a performance improvement plan (“PIP”) due to her “inability to meet the minimum departmental performance goals.” Id. at PageID 201.

At the end of December, Ms. Shivers requested a meeting with Julie Tucker, Charter's Human Resources Manager. During that meeting, Ms. Shivers told Ms. Tucker that Mr. Bliss had “a personal issue against” her because of “[her] age, because of [her] tenure with the company, because [she] was a black woman.” (ECF No. 25-3, PageID 435-36, 562.) Ms. Shivers also complained that Mr. Bliss denied all of her vacation requests. Id. at 435.

Roughly one week later January 2019, Charter put Ms. Shivers on a sixmonth PIP. (ECF No. 25-3, PageID 414-417, 548-49; ECF No. 28-1, PageID 602.) As part of the PIP, Ms. Shivers was put on the mail team, which reduced the number of tickets she was responsible for and made it easier for her to reach her performance goals. (ECF No. 25-3, PageID 439.)

Ms. Shivers' annual performance review was in February 2019. She received a score of 2.3 out of 5, meaning “Partially Achieved Expected Performance.” (ECF No. 25-3, PageID 394; ECF No. 25-2, PageID 201.) That score was too low to qualify her for a raise and CSAs were not eligible for bonuses. (ECF No. 25-1, PageID 136.)

In April 2019, Charter learned that Ms. Shivers hung-up on a customer in March 2019. (ECF No. 25-2, PageID 213.) Charter terminated Ms. Shivers on April 16, 2019 for the hang-up. Id. at PageID 202. She was forty-seven years old at the time of her termination. (ECF No. 1, ¶ 36.)


Ms. Shivers received her right to sue letter in August 2020. (ECF No. 1, PageID 16.) She initiated this action in November 2020, asserting that she was terminated not because of the hang-up but because of her race and gender. (ECF No. 1.) In addition to federal and state race and age discrimination claims, Ms. Shivers asserts state law claims for wrongful discharge, breach of implied contract, promissory estoppel, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Id. Charter denies all claims and moves for judgment on each. (ECF No. 25.)...
Shivers v. Charter Commc'ns (S.D. Ohio 2022)

Outcome: Motion for summary judgment granted.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: