Skip to main content

Daggitt v. United Food And Commercial Workers International Union, Local 304a

8th CircuitApril 4, 2001No. 00-1319Cited 7 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

DiscriminationHarassmentHostile Work Environment

Outcome

Plaintiff Daggitt prevailed on her Title VII sex discrimination and sexual harassment claims against the union, obtaining $50,000 in punitive damages (capped at total damages) and attorney fees of $33,847.13. The appellate court affirmed the jury verdict and rejection of the union's jurisdictional challenge.

What This Ruling Means

**Daggitt v. United Food And Commercial Workers International Union: Sex Discrimination Victory** **What Happened** Susan Daggitt, a worker, sued her union (United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 304A) claiming she faced sex discrimination and sexual harassment that created a hostile work environment. The union tried to argue the court didn't have authority to hear the case, but this challenge was rejected. **What the Court Decided** A jury found in Daggitt's favor, determining the union had indeed discriminated against and sexually harassed her. The court awarded her $50,000 in punitive damages and $33,847.13 in attorney fees. When the union appealed, the higher court upheld both the jury's verdict and the damages awarded. **Why This Matters for Workers** This case demonstrates that unions—not just employers—can be held legally responsible for sex discrimination and sexual harassment. Workers have the right to a workplace free from discrimination, even within union environments. The significant financial penalty ($83,847 total) shows courts take these violations seriously. Workers facing similar situations should know they can pursue legal action under Title VII civil rights law and potentially recover both compensatory damages and attorney fees if successful.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.