Dow Ph.D. cannot sue for blowing the whistle on Tittabawassee Dioxin issues
Priscilla Denney sued Dow Chemical, arguing that she was constructively discharged from her employment because she approached the in-house "compliance officer" about issues relating to the accuracy of Dow's court-ordered Dioxin testing. She argued that she was a victim of illegal Whistleblower retaliation and also gender discrimination, because Dow demoted her to a position that was beneath her after she raised her concerns.
The Court held that simply reporting her concerns to the employer's compliance officer did not create an issue under the Whistleblower Protection Act because she did not report her concerns to a state agency or threaten to do so. Furthermore, the Court held that Denney's reassignment to the "lesser" position did not constitute a "materially adverse employment decision." Lastly, it held that her 3 specific complaints alleging a hostile employment environment were insufficient to be actionable because they were "isolated incidents" not rising to the level of gender discrimination.