Johnson v. Cincy Automall: Court Revives Wrongful Termination Case

In Johnson v. Cincy Automall, Inc., the Ohio Court of Appeals addressed claims of wrongful discharge and sex discrimination following a dispute over workplace conditions and compensation. The appellate court reversed the trial court’s decision, allowing the case to proceed on these issues.

Allegations of Unsafe Work Conditions and Retaliation

Sandra Johnson was hired in July 2020 as a Business Development Manager for Cincy Automall. Her responsibilities included generating sales leads and overseeing certain dealership operations. Her compensation structure involved both a salary and performance-based bonuses.

During her tenure, Johnson raised concerns about workplace health and safety. She alleged that Cincy Automall failed to follow COVID-19 safety protocols, including providing protective equipment, enforcing quarantine policies, and ensuring proper sanitation. She also reported a rodent infestation, citing the presence of mice feces on desks and inadequate pest control measures.

After her internal complaints went unaddressed, Johnson filed a formal complaint with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) on December 15, 2020. She claimed that, in response, Cincy Automall revoked her access to work systems and removed her as an administrator from the dealership’s social media accounts. Days later, she was terminated. Johnson contended that her termination was retaliatory, while Cincy Automall asserted that she had voluntarily resigned following a position reassignment.

Unequal Compensation and Sex Discrimination

In addition to her workplace safety concerns, Johnson alleged that Cincy Automall engaged in sex discrimination regarding bonus payments. She claimed that male sales employees received their bonuses as agreed upon, while she did not receive any, despite being entitled to them under her compensation plan. Cincy Automall argued that Johnson had not provided sufficient evidence to prove that she was treated differently from similarly situated male employees.

Appellate Court’s Reversal of Summary Judgment

The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Cincy Automall, dismissing Johnson’s claims of wrongful discharge and sex discrimination. However, the Ohio Court of Appeals reversed that decision, concluding that Johnson had presented enough evidence to proceed with her claims.

Regarding wrongful discharge, the appellate court emphasized Ohio’s established public policy protecting employees from retaliation for reporting workplace safety concerns. The court found that Johnson’s OSHA complaint qualified as a protected activity under Ohio law. The appellate court also determined that Johnson had presented a valid claim of sex discrimination under Ohio’s anti-discrimination laws, as Cincy Automall failed to provide a sufficient explanation for the alleged pay disparity.

Case Remanded for Further Proceedings

With the appellate ruling, Johnson’s claims will return to the trial court for further proceedings. The decision highlights the importance of workplace safety protections and the legal standards for proving employment discrimination. Employers should take note of the legal risks associated with failing to address employee complaints regarding health hazards and pay disparities.

Employment Law Guidance

At Whitcomb, Selinsky, PC, we assist employees and businesses in navigating complex labor and employment law matters. If you need legal guidance on wrongful termination, workplace discrimination, or retaliation claims, contact our team for a consultation.