Could Using Someone’s Incorrect Job Title Constitute Harassment or Unlawful Discrimination?

March 11, 2025

As is almost always the case, the answer is “it depends,” and the facts matter – but it certainly might. A recent EEOC decision considered whether the complainant was subjected to a hostile work environment based on race (white), national origin (Hispanic, Latina), and sex (female) when the agency’s Chief of Staff referred to her, a GS-14 Program Analyst, as “[Supervisor’s] helper” in a meeting with colleagues in the Office of Human Resources Management. Kenyatta S. v. GSA, EEOC App. No. 2024003194 (Sept. 30, 2024).

The complainant attempted to immediately address the situation with the Chief of Staff, but he “brushed it off and continued the meeting,” so after the meeting ended, she contacted him again and explained that she was “offended by the way he characterized her role and working relationship” to the supervisor. Id. at 3. According to the complainant, the Chief of Staff apologized but immediately started asking questions about the meeting, and while the Chief of Staff also wrote an apology, he “did not take responsibility for his actions and failed to acknowledge the mental anguish she experienced as a result of the comment.” Id. at 4. As a result, the complainant resigned from her position and filed an EEO complaint.

The agency dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim, but on appeal EEOC reversed the agency’s dismissal and remanded the case. Ordinarily events that occur infrequently and are not severe do not state a claim, but EEOC found this case to be more in line with case law that has found “a limited number of highly offensive slurs or comments may in fact state a claim or support a finding of discrimination…” Brooks v. Navy, EEOC Req. No. 05950484 (Jun. 25, 1996). Id. at 10. The Commission also referenced case law that found dropping a person’s title or name when such conduct was intended to demean and challenge their legitimacy or presence within a group constituted harassment. Id. at 13. (emphasis added)

Here, the Commission held that considering the intersectionality of the complainant’s race, sex and national origin, combined with the social context, the Chief of Staff’s conduct toward the complainant was severe enough to state a claim because he “effectively challenged the legitimacy of Complainant’s role within the Agency and called her competence as a GS-14 level employee into question. Moreover, the term ‘helper’ connotates a cultural stereotype specific to Hispanic/Latina women. Complainant was humiliated and distressed. She also feared for her professional reputation.” Id. at 14.

The EEOC remanded the case to be processed as a mixed case because the complainant alleged a constructive discharge in addition to a hostile work environment. [email protected]

Have a question? Ask FELTG.

Related training

• EEOC Law Week, March 24-28
• Conducting Effective Harassment Investigations, April 29 – May 1

The information presented is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. Contacting FELTG in any way/format does not create the existence of an attorney-client relationship. If you need legal advice, you should contact an attorney.