Mitchell v. Teck Cominco Alaska, Inc.

Maurice Mitchell (plaintiff) was a warehouse supervisor at the Red Dog Mine (mine), which was operated by Mitchell’s employer, Teck Cominco Alaska, Inc. (Teck) (defendant). Mitchell was romantically interested in a woman, LB, who worked for a contractor at the mine. Mitchell enlisted the help of a mutual friend, Carla, to communicate with LB about possibly meeting Mitchell. Mitchell also communicated, through Carla, that he might be able to help LB secure summer work at the warehouse. LB interpreted this as an offer of employment in exchange for sex and complained to her supervisor. Teck then initiated an investigation, and two Teck supervisors interviewed Mitchell. The parties disputed what happened at the meeting, but Mitchell alleged that he was not told that he was accused of offering LB a job in exchange for sex. The meeting lasted no more than five minutes, and Mitchell was not given an opportunity to explain his side of the story. Carla provided a written statement reflecting that her discussion with LB about a summer job in the warehouse was separate from her discussion with LB about Mitchell’s personal interest in her. Teck did not contact Mitchell again during its investigation and ultimately terminated Mitchell’s employment, although there was evidence that Teck had disciplined other similarly situated employees less harshly than Mitchell, who was African American. For example, Tech merely issued a written warning to a White supervisor who sexually harassed a contractor’s employee. Mitchell sued Teck for race discrimination and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The race-discrimination claim was dismissed, and the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment on the contract claim. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of Teck, and Mitchell appealed.