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

establishing a prima facie hostile work environment claim.

13
Qwest argues that these racial comments were not directed at Alonso personally. But a

defendant need not levy derogatory racially charged language directly at the plaintiff to subject
the plaintiff to a hostile work environment and survive summary judgment. See Davis v. West
One Automotive Group, 140 Wn. App. 449, 457, 166 P. 3d 807 ( 2007), review denied, 163 Wn.2d
1040 ( 2008) ( defendant' s derogatory statements about Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and calling
African American plaintiff a " bitch" could be considered racially motivated and subjected
plaintiff to hostile work environment).

14
             

No. 43703 - 1 - II

B. Harassment' s Effect and Consequences

Next, the parties disagree whether the harassment affected the terms and conditions of

Alonso' s employment.

To determine whether conduct was severe or pervasive enough to affect the terms and

conditions of employment, we look at the totality of the circumstances, including the frequency

and severity of harassing conduct, whether it was physically threatening or humiliating, or

merely an offensive utterance, and whether it unreasonably interfered with the employee' s work

performance. Washington v. The Boeing Co., 105 Wn. App. 1, 10, 19 P. 3d 1041 ( 2000).

Whether offensive comments affect the conditions of employment is a factual question. See

Davis v. West One Auto. Group, 140 Wn. App. 449, 457, 166 P. 3d 807 ( 2007) ( holding that

employee' s alleged Humiliation and self diagnosed
- mental sickness from " racially charged"

workplace comments raised inference that condition resulted from hostile work environment),