She swore once at work — her seven male peers did it daily without consequence
A former DuPont manager — the only woman on an eight-person team — alleges she was fired for language her male peers used daily.
Connie Johnson filed the lawsuit on February 24, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania against DuPont Specialty Products USA, LLC, raising claims of sex-based discrimination, disability discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation.
Johnson had served as a First Line Manager at the company's Towanda, Pennsylvania location since January 2019. By her account, she was a strong performer who had earned a promotion to a senior supervisor level pay grade. She was also, according to the suit, the only female among eight First Line Managers.
The dispute traces back to April 2024, when Johnson used a swear word during an asset meeting while trying to stop two individuals who were in a heated argument. That kind of language, the suit claims, was common among the male managers on her team. One allegedly swore on a daily basis in front of peers and employees and was never placed on a performance improvement plan or disciplined the way Johnson was.
Johnson was treated differently. The company's HR leader investigated the incident and placed Johnson on a PIP in early June 2024. The plan cited not only the swearing, but also accused her of showing "favoritism" and treating employees unfairly — accusations she says she had never heard before. When she asked for documentation to support them, according to the suit, none was provided.
Around the same time, Johnson told HR she was working with doctors to address a thyroid ailment, in addition to diagnosed anxiety and depression. What followed, she alleges, came fast.
According to the lawsuit, HR accused Johnson of being a "liar" and did not allow her to respond to the accusations. She was then instructed to speak with the engineer who had originally reported the swearing incident — and when she did, following those exact instructions, she was suspended on June 19 for "retaliation." Two days later, she was terminated.
Johnson is seeking at least $150,000 per count under Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and a Pennsylvania state anti-discrimination law. No determination has been made on the merits of her claims, and the company has not yet publicly responded.
Even at this early stage, the case surfaces questions HR leaders would do well to sit with. The scenario described — where identical conduct draws discipline for one employee and not for seven others, and that one employee is also the only woman — is the kind of fact pattern employment lawyers build cases around.
The timeline after the disability disclosure is equally notable. And the allegation that HR gave a directive that was later used as the basis for a suspension speaks directly to process consistency — an area where HR credibility is either built or broken.
None of these claims have been proven. But as a case study in what can go wrong when disciplinary processes lack consistency and documentation, this one is worth watching.
Johnson v. DuPont Specialty Products USA, LLC, Case No. 4:26-cv-00461.
