Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 43703-1-II Published Opinion.pdf

11
             

No. 43703 -1 - II

from his Mexican -American heritage and speech impediment disability, as well as his disabled

veteran status. The bullying was so pervasive that other employees noticed and sympathized

with Alonso; one coworker opined that Alonso' s treatment was so bad that "[ i] t was evident in

the way that Ben Martinez treated Joseph Alonso that he did not like him and that he was trying

to make Joseph' s working conditions so poor that Joseph would quit." CP at 140. Because of

the severity of this unbridled bullying and harassment, this hostile work environment amounted

to an adverse employment action.

D. Conclusion

We hold that Alonso has sufficiently established a prima facie disparate treatment case

under the direct evidence test. We view the evidence in a light most favorable to Alonso as the

nonmoving party and further hold that Alonso produced direct evidence of ( 1) Martinez' s

discriminatory motive —his hatred toward Alonso as a disabled Gulf War veteran with a speech

impediment, and ( 2) how he suffered adverse employment decisions —loss of his newer van and

cell phone, and an increasingly hostile work environment laden with bullying and mockery of his

Mexican- American heritage and disabilities.

II. HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT

Alonso next argues that he presented sufficient evidence of a hostile work environment to

defeat summary judgment for Qwest. Specifically, Alonso contends that Martinez and others

made comments based on their animus toward his protected statuses; their harassment affected

his employment; and Martinez' s participation in the harassment is imputed to Qwest. Viewing