Woman Wins $11.7 Million Judgment Jury Finds Johnson & Johnson Punished Her For Charging Sexual Discrimination

A 17-year employee of Johnson & Johnson has been awarded $11.7 million in damages by a jury that found the company retaliated against her when she complained it discriminated against women.

“We were overwhelmed,” said attorney Victoria Vreeland, whose client, Jennifer Passantino, claimed Johnson & Johnson had a “glass ceiling” that prevented women from advancing.

After a three-week trial, the U.S. District Court jury of six men and two women did not find discrimination but decided the company took retaliatory measures when Passantino, a sales manager, talked to the human resources division about her concerns.

It awarded Passantino $8.6 million in punitive damages, exceeding by far a ceiling of $300,000. U.S. District Judge Robert J. Bryan has yet to sort out that issue, Vreeland said.

The jury also awarded Passantino $2.1 million in economic losses and $1 million for emotional distress.

Johnson & Johnson, based in New Brunswick, N.J., has 89,300 employees worldwide and reported a profit of $2.89 billion last year. The company sells primarily health-care products, including surgical instruments, dressings and contraceptives.

Company officials said the June 20 verdict would be appealed.

“We feel this is an absolutely preposterous judgment with no basis in fact and we are confident it will be overturned on appeal,” a spokesman said Thursday.

Passantino, 43, has worked for seven years without a promotion despite good performance evaluations, Vreeland said. Passantino has found it tough to advance, even though she always met her sales quota as a sales manager who sells to military exchanges, Vreeland said.

The company has several questionable practices, Vreeland said, including promoting men to executive positions without posting job openings or promotion opportunities, and responding inadequately to concerns raised by Passantino and other female employees about how women were treated.

In those instances, the company always sided with supervisors instead of investigating the claims, Vreeland said.

Johnson & Johnson decided Passantino wasn’t fit for an executive position after she raised concerns with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission about the lack of opportunities for women, Vreeland said.

During the trial, the jury heard a tape of Passantino’s performance evaluation conference last year in which a company president and a supervisor said a marketing job she was interested in did not constitute a promotion.

But company records showed the marketing job paid $20,000 to $30,000 more than Passantino’s current position and was graded higher on a job-level scale.

“She’s a very conservative person and had never considered in her life that discrimination existed,” Vreeland said. “She knew she had to do something. It was either that or just be stuck for the rest of her career.”

Passantino, who lives in Lakewood, near Tacoma, has two daughters and is the family’s main breadwinner, the attorney said. She and her husband, Charles, decided 15 years ago that he would be a homemaker while she pursued her career.

“I’m sure she’ll eventually leave the company. I’m sure they don’t want her to be there,” Vreeland said.