Rebouche v. Deere & Co., No. 14-2815 (8th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseRebouche began working for Deere as a technician in 1977. She claims she was passed over for promotions and asked to train male supervisors. In 1998 she and three others filed a complaint with human resources. As a result a supervisor was sent to sensitivity training. In 2002-2004 Deere engaged a consulting firm and redefined job titles. Rebouche alleges that none of the women in her department received pay grade increases, while men were elevated. Rebouche file a complaint with the EEOC. She was subsequently promoted. The district court granted summary judgment, rejecting her claims under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2(a) and Iowa law. The Eighth Circuit affirmed, finding that allegations concerning events in 1998-2001 were time barred; that Rebouche failed to establish that similarly-situated males were treated differently during the remapping of jobs; and that there was no evidence of retaliation for the EEOC filing.
Court Description: Kelly, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Colloton, Circuit Judge] Civil case - Employment discrimination. The alleged discriminatory acts plaintiff faced in 1998 and 2001 were time barred as they occurred years before she filed a formal complaint with the EEOC in 2004; with respect to a company wide global job evaluation which occurred in 2004 and which plaintiff contends discriminated against her on the basis of her gender, she failed to establish a prima facie case because she failed to produce evidence that similarly situated males were treated differently; plaintiff failed to produce any evidence that a delay in her promotion was retaliatory.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.