Open in App
  • Local
  • U.S.
  • Election
  • Politics
  • Crime
  • Sports
  • Lifestyle
  • Education
  • Real Estate
  • Newsletter
  • Lexington HeraldLeader

    Woman suing Scott County airport alleges sexual assault, discrimination from supervisor

    By Taylor Six,

    5 days ago

    The Georgetown-Scott County Airport Corporation is facing a lawsuit that claims an employee sexually assaulted a female subordinate and discriminated against her when they terminated her position.

    The woman filed suit Monday in Scott County Circuit Court against the airport corporation and its operations manager, Scott Hampton, claiming sexual harassment, hostile work environment, pregnancy discrimination, retaliation and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

    The Herald-Leader does not identify alleged victims of assault.

    The plaintiff was employed by the airport from January 2023 through April 2024, and reported directly to Hampton.

    James Toole, the manager of the airport, declined to comment when contacted by the Herald-Leader on Tuesday.

    The airport has not yet responded to the plaintiff’s filing, court records show.

    According to the lawsuit, Hampton would make inappropriate comments toward the woman, including:

    • “Once you go Black, you don’t go back.”
    • “These are my magic hands,” as he put his arm around the woman and rubbed her back.
    • “I’d squeeze (a woman’s breasts) every day if I could.”

    The woman did not consent to being touched and would reply, “That’s not appropriate,” “Do not touch me,” and “Do not talk to me like that,” according to the lawsuit.

    Hampton is alleged to have made additional “hateful, shocking and prejudiced comments regarding women and African Americans,” according to the lawsuit.

    The lawsuit alleges Hampton retaliated against the plaintiff’s rejection by freezing her out of work assignments and treating her differently than other employees.

    On October 17, 2023, the woman reported a complaint to Toole, and submitted a written complaint two days later.

    As a result, the woman was placed on administrative leave by the airport, while Hampton was permitted to continue working.

    After an investigation, the woman was notified she would report to Toole and would not be supervised by Hampton. She was permitted to perform administrative work to avoid being around Hampton.

    Court documents allege Hampton was allowed to stay at the airport overnight one evening, while the woman was on the night shift — leaving her alone with him.

    In March 2024, the chairman of the airport board, Steve Woodrum, informed the woman she would again report to Hampton, according to the complaint. During that same meeting, the woman reported she was pregnant, and would not be able to perform certain line duties — lift heavy objects or inhale jet fumes — as a result.

    Woodrum reportedly responded that the airport had “never had a pregnant employee,” so he was unsure if she could continue her employment because she could not do line work, and the administrative work was suddenly unavailable to her.

    During a March 20, meeting, the board “made it clear that it was not interested in accommodating pregnancy-related requests and mandated she work directly with Hampton, who she previously made complaints about regarding sexual harassment,” the suit claims.

    The woman was “constructively discharged” from her employment at the airport on April 3, according to court documents.

    “As a result of the sexual harassment, retaliation, and refusal to accommodate her pregnancy, (the plaintiff), will require therapy, in order to properly diagnose and help (the plaintiff) through this traumatic chapter in her life.

    “...The working conditions at the airport were so difficult, unpleasant and grotesque that a reasonable person in (the plaintiff’s) position would have felt that there was no other choice but to resign.”

    The woman is seeking compensatory damages for past and future lost wages and future lost benefits, and damages related to emotional distress, mental anguish and humiliation.

    “We feel very strongly that (the plaintiff) was unlawfully treated in this situation,” attorney Bradley Zoppoth told the Herald-Leader. “Her employment was a strong one. She had no performance or attendance issues and unfortunately she was subjected to a lot of bad, unfortunate comments — unlawful comments — of a sexual nature that shouldn’t be tolerated anywhere, especially in the workplace.”

    Expand All
    Comments / 0
    Add a Comment
    YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
    Most Popular newsMost Popular

    Comments / 0