Noonan worked as a graphic designer, and claimed that another male employee, who was a content creator and part-time photographer, was paid more.
When Noonan was hired, she asked for $46,000 but eventually agreed to $39,000. The company offered another male employee the role “Senior Graphic Designer” at $45,000, but he negotiated to $68,000 to align with his current salary at another company.
In 2019, a co-worker at Consolidated Shoe found the male employee’s paystub and shared it with Noonan. According to the case, “Noonan was shocked by what she saw — [the male employee] made considerably more than she did.” Noonan confronted leadership about the discrepancy and alleged sex discrimination and asked for a raise. She was told it was a “fireable offense” to know about another employee’s salary. Human Resources later confirmed she could not be fired for knowing another employee’s salary.
The company conducted an investigation on the issue of sex discrimination and concluded there was no wage discrimination because the male employee’s compensation aligned with his greater job duties, experience and skills.
Eventually, Noonan and her male peer were terminated in June 2020 over pandemic-related cuts.
The district court dismissed the case, holding that Noonan and the male peer did not perform similar jobs so she could not rely upon him to show a comparator to prove wage discrimination.
On appeal, the former employee moved away from citing the male coworker as a comparator and...
Welcome to Reality Check, NewsGuard’s nonpartisan newsletter that tracks the false claims and conspiracy theories that shape our world — and who’s behind them. Please support us by becoming a premi...