Former Southeast softball coach sues Board of Regents; seeks damages and her job back

A former, longtime softball coach at Southeast Missouri State University has sued the school and its Board of Regents, contending the loss of her job amounted to gender discrimination and retaliation.

Lana Richmond of Cape Girardeau served as head softball coach for 32 years before her contract was not renewed in 2014.

She initially filed the lawsuit in Cape Girardeau County Circuit Court on Jan. 26.

An amended suit was filed Feb. 15.

On March 15, the case, which alleges her federal rights were violated, was moved to U.S. District Court in Cape Girardeau.

Richmond’s petition requests a jury trial.

The lawsuit contends Southeast discriminated against Richmond by “failing to treat her equally to male coaches, allowing her to be discriminated against by her supervisors, subjecting her to different and heightened scrutiny at work, holding her to different and higher standards and retaliating against her for engaging in conduct protected by Title VII.”

The two-count suit also accuses the university of violating Richmond’s rights under Title IX of federal law.

But St. Louis lawyer Robert Kaiser, representing Southeast and the regents, argued in a court motion the second count should be dismissed on the grounds there is “no private right of action” for a Title IX violation.

The remedy for such a violation is denial of federal funding, Kaiser wrote.

Title IX is meant to ensure equal access to facilities, equipment and funding for male and female student athletes, according to the suit.

Title IX and Title VII protect students and faculty who complain about equity issues from retaliation, the suit states.

Des Moines, Iowa, lawyer Thomas Newkirk, who represents Richmond, said his client’s case is just one of many cases nationwide that demonstrate the “double standard” in college athletics in which female coaches are treated as “second-class citizens.”

As head softball coach, Richmond had more than 880 wins, coaching teams that captured five conference championships and made several NCAA appearances, the petition states.

She was named Coach of the Year in 1987, 1989, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998 and 2009. She was inducted into the Missouri Sports Hall of Fame in 2016.

The suit alleges despite her “high level of success, she was not given the same level of support” from the school as male coaches or men’s sports.

The team’s performance declined during her last several years as head coach.

During her last four seasons, the team won 82 games but lost 127.

During her last two years, the softball team lost more than twice as many games as it won, university online records show.

According to the lawsuit, male coaches received “higher compensation packages and longer contracts.”

The suit contends “male coaches were held to lower performance standards and were permitted leniency in off-the-field conduct.”

The petition alleges “men’s sports teams were provided with more funding, more support services and staff, better media packaging and better playing and practice facilities.”

Richmond complained to the athletics department the school failed to provide the softball team with the same quality facilities as men’s teams, the suit states.

It is alleged in spring 2012, “the softball field became unusable because the facilities staff applied the wrong chemicals to the grass which made it unsafe to play on when it rained.”

According to the petition, Richmond repeatedly asked the school to repair the field.

Richmond said she voiced her concerns about the field’s condition to a sports broadcaster and indicated she felt the school was not in compliance with Title IX, the suit states.

The university responded by “reluctantly fixing the field for the remainder of the 2012 season,” according to the petition.

It is alleged Southeast revised its personnel manual to limit staff communication with the media after Richmond complained publicly about the field.

In 2013, Richmond sought merit raises for two female assistant coaches.

The raises were denied, the suit states.

After Richmond’s pay-equity complaints about staff for male and female teams, the university “updated its personnel policies to provide that merit raises would be given on a subjective case by case basis by the athletics director and (school) president,” the petition states.

The university retaliated by giving Richmond a negative evaluation after the 2012-2013 season, according to the suit.

According to the petition, the negative evaluation stated she “failed to get along” with facility field personnel in 2013 and included a “vague summary of player complaints regarding the softball team’s win-loss record.”

Southeast did not fully investigate player complaints or give Richmond an opportunity to review or respond to the player complaints, the petition states.

In June 2013, the university renewed Richmond’s contract for one year.

Then-athletics director Mark Alnutt changed the athletics department mission statement to include “competitive success as a metric for coaches’ evaluations” after Richmond successfully appealed her 2012-2013 evaluation, according to the petition.

Male coaches with poor performance records historically had not been disciplined and had their multiyear contracts renewed in contrast to female coaches who were given one-year renewals, the suit states.

“The addition of the competitiveness performance metric was retaliatory because Ms. Richmond had lost two starting pitchers for the 2013 season and had a team composed primarily of freshmen,” according to the petition.

Alnutt informed the softball players they would be asked to report on their coach at the end of the 2013-2014 season, the suit states.

According to the lawsuit, Richmond’s “ability to effectively coach was impeded by the players’ knowledge that they had the upper hand against their coach during the entire season.”

The petition states Richmond “was not privy to the complaints that were raised by the players ... but she was told that the players did not have a positive softball experience because they did not win enough.”

She subsequently was replaced “by a male with a worse win-loss record as head coach” who then had his contract renewed despite two losing seasons, the suit states.

Newkirk said many female college athletes across the country complain about their female coaches, whereas male athletes are less likely to do so.

Colleges are using these complaints as a reason to fire female coaches, something their male counterparts are not facing, Newkirk said.

Newkirk, who represents several female coaches, said Richmond’s case and others like it reflect “implicit gender bias” in university administrations and society in general, particularly as it relates to women in leadership roles.

Richmond alleges she “suffered a loss of employment, loss of wages and benefits, emotional pain and suffering, humiliation, embarrassment, damage to her reputation, loss of career and out-of-pocket expenses.”

The suit seeks reinstatement of Richmond as head softball coach, compensatory and punitive damages, an audit of the university regarding its compliance with Title IX and a court mandate that Southeast provide additional remedies and funding “to make up for shortcomings and the failure to make progress as required by Title IX.”

mbliss@semissourian.com

(573) 388-3641