Misogyny + HR Hell=Millions Awarded to Employees

We all know that HR is not on the employees’ side. HR is a function that exists to protect the company from risk and liability associated with hiring, managing, and firing employees. HR, although reviled by multiple stakeholders in any organization, is a crucial department that mitigates risk. What happens when a corporate culture that is imbued in institutional misogyny merges with ineffective or unempowered HR? Bad things for the company. 

Let’s talk about the GOAT of HR hell—Novartis. In 2005, while at a company boondoggle, a female employee was raped by one of the physicians in attendance. She reported the crime to her manager, but rather than receiving support, her manager questioned her clothing and behavior, asking what she had done to "lead him on." When the matter was brought to Human Resources, the response was equally dismissive. A Novartis HR executive essentially told her that since the assailant was a high-prescribing client, she needed to "get over it" for the sake of the business relationship. The HR executive informed this victim that "HR is not for you; HR is for the company.”

Following the incident, the victim’s career was derailed, and she faced a hostile work environment that ignored her trauma while prioritizing sales relationships. She was effectively blackballed, her performance ratings dropped, and she was eventually pushed out of the company. This incident, and the horrendous manner in which Novartis handled the matter, was central to Velez v. Novartis, a class-action lawsuit that resulted in one of the largest employment discrimination verdicts in US history. The case represented 5600+ female employees who alleged systemic gender discrimination regarding pay, promotions, and pregnancy. In 2010, the jury awarded the plaintiffs $253.3M in punitive damages. 

Given the publicity that the Novartis case received, you would assume that companies—especially large ones—would take heed, shore up their HR practices, and do everything in their power to avoid the horrendous PR nightmare that Novartis encountered. But no. Let me tell you how bro culture, misogyny, and a gelded HR organization collided to result in a $22.5M award to a former employee. Read on, dear reader.

Total Quality Logistics (TQL), $8B behemoth in the freight brokerage industry, had a female employee. That employee experienced a high-risk pregnancy and was advised by two separate specialist physicians that she needed to stay off her feet and that a work-from-home arrangement would be best for her and her unborn child. In fact, both doctors sent letters to TQL stating that working from home was a medical necessity to prevent complications arising from the physical activity and stress of the office environment. 

Most employers would heed this request, regardless of policy. But not TQL. Despite the logistics industry proving its ability to function remotely during the pandemic, TQL maintained one of the most rigid anti-WFH stances in the country. They denied her request and told her to “get f*cked” (quote from court documents) or quit if she couldn’t be in the office. The plaintiff’s baby was born prematurely and died shortly thereafter. 

Under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), employers are required to engage in an interactive process to find reasonable accommodations. Testimony indicated that HR did not use this process to find a solution; instead, they simply relayed the executive decision that remote work was not an option, regardless of the two medical letters provided. TQL’s HR served as a barrier rather than a bridge, telling the employee that the office policy was non-negotiable despite the risk to her baby. As a result, the jury held the entire corporate structure, including the HR function, accountable for the tragic outcome.

The Novartis case proved that systemic misogyny exists and can be embedded into company culture. The TQL case demonstrates that structural misogyny can now carry the same level of punitive moral outrage from a jury. While separated by nearly two decades, the $22.5M TQL verdict (2026) and the $250M Novartis verdict (2010) serve as bookends to a persistent history of corporate misogyny. Both cases reveal a culture in which Human Resources serves as a defensive wall for the company rather than a protective resource for the employee.

The staggering verdicts against Novartis and TQL serve as a grim masterclass in the financial and moral bankruptcy of the shield model of Human Resources. When HR exists solely to protect the company’s immediate bottom line and ceases to mitigate risk, it becomes the primary engine of liability. These cases prove that institutional misogyny is no longer just a PR headache; it is a catastrophic legal vulnerability. Institutional, structural, and cultural misogyny can cost companies big time. The lesson for the corporate world is clear: until HR is empowered to prioritize human life and legal compliance over "bro-culture" dogmas, the cost of doing business will continue to include the price of their own systemic failures.