ST. LOUIS – Eleven women have filed a federal class action lawsuit against Leadec Corporation, alleging that for more than a decade the company failed to prevent pervasive sexual harassment and retaliated against those who complained while working at the General Motors plant in Wentzville.
The company violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by fostering and tolerating a hostile work environment for hundreds of female employees from summer 2011 through fall 2022, according to a complaint filed July 29 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.
The plaintiffs — all former employees — seek to represent a class of women who worked as either bargaining unit custodial staff or on-site non-bargaining unit employees at the facility during that time.
The women endured daily or near-daily harassment from male co-workers, including physical contact, sexual comments, threats and coercion, the complaint states.
The complaint states that the harassment was widespread, open and often involved individuals in positions of power.
The plaintiffs allege that the company’s managers and supervisors either ignored the behavior, participated in it or failed to take effective action despite repeated complaints.
The filing asserts that complaints were made through various channels — including supervisors, human resources and hotline calls — yet Leadec “failed to take adequate steps reasonably calculated to curtail” the harassment.
The plaintiffs claim this inaction allowed the misconduct to continue for years, with alleged retaliation against those who spoke up.
Retaliatory acts described in the complaint include demotions, undesirable work assignments, denial of promotions, threats, stalking, damage to personal property, and termination.
The complaint states that in many cases, supervisors actively discouraged formal complaints, “lost” written reports, or revealed the identities of complainants to the alleged harassers.
In some instances, the plaintiffs claim evidence of misconduct was destroyed.
The women allege that company leadership at both the local and corporate levels was aware of the harassment but took little to no corrective action until 2019, when three male employees identified as primary instigators were terminated.
Even then, the plaintiffs contend, retaliation persisted.
The named plaintiffs each describe personal experiences of repeated harassment and its aftermath.
Several allege they developed post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety or other health conditions as a result of their treatment at the plant. Others say they were forced to quit or were terminated in retaliation for making complaints.
One plaintiff, Amanda Meyer Simon, claims she began reporting harassment as early as 2011 but saw no significant action from the company until years later.
Another, Cheryl Sronce, alleges she narrowly escaped a sexual assault at work and later faced efforts to remove her from her union position after rejecting advances.
Lytishia Jones states she found a sexual assault victim unconscious at the facility and that her own complaints were ignored for years.
Other plaintiffs describe being propositioned for sexual favors in exchange for job benefits, subjected to sexually explicit comments, or physically assaulted by co-workers. Several claim that retaliation included damage to personal vehicles and being stalked.
The lawsuit asserts that Leadec’s corporate culture and practices enabled the misconduct, and that the company “seldom, if ever” disciplined supervisors who ignored harassment complaints, while punishing or forcing out those who tried to address it.
The plaintiffs allege that the company’s harassment training was either nonexistent or ineffective, with some employees never receiving any instruction on how to address workplace sexual harassment.
The plaintiffs seek substantial monetary damages, alleging that without court intervention Leadec will continue to tolerate harassment of women at other locations nationwide and internationally.
The complaint states that the hostile work environment persisted until the company’s custodial contract at the Wentzville plant ended in 2022.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Eastern Division case number: 4:25-cv-01144
