IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF IOWA FOR POLK COUNTY

TRACEY GRIESBAUM,

CL No.

Plaintiff,
vs.
THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA, BOARD OF
REGENTS, and the STATE OF IOWA

PETITION AND JURY DEMAND

Defendants.

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Tracey Griesbaum, by and through her attorneys, and for her
cause of action hereby states the following:

INTRODUCTION
Disparity of Female Coaches in Education and Sports
1.

More women than men attend and graduate from college today.

2.

Women contribute over half of the tuition and provide their respective educational

institutions access to over half of the federal funds given to universities and colleges across the
United States.
3.

Despite these contributions and a legal right to equality, women remain in second-

class status in college athletics, and they are losing ground.
4.

The primary source of continued inequality for women in college athletics is

gender bias and gender stereotypes. These biases are real, they are extensive and they are
powerful.

 5.

Gender biases cause athletic departments to regularly apply double standards and

deny women full equality.
6.

Gender biases no longer have any place in our society and constitute illegal

behavior under our laws.
7.

Gender bias adversely affects female coaches more strongly when they lead teams

and develop athletes in the same manner as male coaches do.
8.

These biases or double standards arise from the expectations placed on women

coaches to be strong and competitive, but also mothering and nurturing towards female athletes.
Male coaches have no such expectations placed on them when coaching either gender.
9.

Because of the bias, most female coaches know they are required to work very

hard to meet the double standards and adapt their coaching styles by:
a. Monitoring their language.
b. Worrying about how to make all the players happy.
c. Attempting to make the parents of the student athletes happy.
d. Monitoring how and when they challenge administration about department
policies, intercollegiate protocols, and program resources.
10.

When complaints are made against female coaches, they are considered guilty in

the eyes of administrations.
11.

Where a male coach may be called tough and competitive, a female coach with

the same demeanor is called mean and abusive.
12.

Even when proven innocent, usually after a protracted process, a female coach

will often have her contract terminated because gender bias created continuing doubts about her.

 13.

This is what happened to Plaintiff Tracey Griesbaum.

PARTIES
14.

Plaintiff Tracey Griesbaum is a resident and citizen of Iowa City, Johnson

County, Iowa.
15.

Defendant The University of Iowa is located in Iowa City, Iowa, established and

maintained pursuant to Iowa Code Chapter 263.
16.

The University of Iowa’s purpose of teaching, research and service is intended to

be provided to men and women on equal terms.
17.

Defendant Board of Regents, the State of Iowa, resides and has its principal place

of business in Des Moines, Polk County, Iowa, established and maintained pursuant to Iowa
Code Chapter 262.
18.

The Board of Regents’ purpose is to govern five public education institutions,

including the University of Iowa and the University of Iowa Athletic Department, in the state
through policymaking, coordination, and oversight.
19.

The State of Iowa resides and has its principal place of business in Des Moines,

Polk County, Iowa.
20.

The acts of which Plaintiff complains occurred in Iowa City, Johnson County,

Iowa.
PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS
21.

Prior to filing this action, Tracey Griesbaum filed charges of employment

discrimination on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, and retaliation against Defendants with

 the Iowa Civil Rights Commission under the employment and education provisions of the Iowa
Civil Rights Act.
22.

All three of these complaints were screened in by the Iowa Civil Rights

Commission, which issued its findings on November 30, 2015.
23.

Tracey Griesbaum has obtained a Right to Sue letter from the Iowa Civil Rights

Commission on December 23, 2015.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
Legal and Historical Structure for These Claims
24.

This is an action against the University of Iowa and the State of Iowa for

discrimination in employment and in education based on gender discrimination, sexual
orientation discrimination, and retaliation for participation in a protected activity in violation of
Plaintiff Tracey Griesbaum’s rights protected by state law.
25.

This action is brought to redress Tracey Griesbaum’s rights under the Iowa Civil

Rights Act, Chapter 216 (hereinafter “ICRA”).
26.

Under the ICRA women have a right to be treated equally in all aspects of

employment or education including being free from the negative effects of gender bias that
disfavor females and normally favor males in college athletics.
27.

The ICRA also protects Iowans from sexual orientation discrimination.

28.

The athletic system across the country at the collegiate level openly and internally

favors males in sports and devalues the rights of females to participate equally in athletics and
coaching.

 29.

While women have advanced as leaders in society in general, a host of barriers

still limit progress, evidenced by the fact that women hold only about 15-20% of the leadership
positions in our country. This includes governors, legislators and Fortune 500 companies.
College athletics is a system that is even more male-centric than most organizations1, and it is
therefore at an even higher risk for gender bias when women try to step into roles long held by
males.
30.

Women in college athletics live and work within a system that is rife with many

of the trappings of sexism. The current preferences and support for male sports such as football,
basketball, baseball and wrestling reflect old traditions and perceptions that women cannot
participate in sports in the same way as males. Changing this antiquated notion and creating
equal opportunity for men and women in education and athletics was part of the impetus for
Congress to pass Title IX.
31.

This is not an action alleging claims under Title IX of the Education Amendments

of 1972. References to violations of Title IX or the decision to ignore rights under that statute
are included for context and to provide additional evidence of discrimination based on gender.
These facts are also evidence of gender bias and discrimination, which violates the Iowa Civil
Rights Act.
32.

Title IX requires “continued progress” for women and was intended to ensure that

women would someday be permitted to participate in and enjoy the benefits of athletics in the
same way as males. No other federal law that provides for equality requires that the minority
group put up with being treated unequally for years until “society catches up.”
1

In the 2014-2015 academic year, only 33 of 353 Division I Athletic Directors were women. See NCAA
Sport Sponsorship, Participation and Demographics Search engine (available at
http://web1.ncaa.org/rgdSearch/exec/instSearch.)

 33.

Women have put up with this legally sanctioned second-class status for almost 50

years in federal law.
Iowa law has no such “continuing progress” exceptions and requires equality.

34.

The University of Iowa Athletics Department Under the Barta Administration
35.

From 2006 to 2014, the Barta Administration has undermined, forced out or

terminated six highly-qualified female coaches and one administrator.
36.

The decisions surrounding the departure of these six women were based on:
a. A lack of support or interest in women actually being competitive (Gayle Blevins,
Kelly Crawford, Tracey Griesbaum).
b. Female coaches requesting that Barta provide more equal facilities (Cindy
Fredrick, Mandi Kowal, Tracey Griesbaum, Sharon Dingman).
c. Overreaction to complaints of female student athletes toward their female coaches
(Blevins, Fredrick, Kowal, Dingman, and Griesbaum).
d. The responses to women who directly challenged the administration (Crawford,
Fredrick, Dingman, Griesbaum and Jane Meyer).

37.

A male coach is permitted to yell, curse, threaten, throw things, be ejected from

games and push athletes to the edge of their ability even if it sometimes results in injury. This is
clear with the Iowa football, wrestling, and men’s basketball teams, which are coached by allmale staffs.
38.

Male coaches for men’s and women’s teams are permitted to manage their staffs

and their roster to achieve successful results. Female coaches are deprived generally of such
latitude. For example:

 a. If a male athlete leaves a program, it is rarely scrutinized.
b. If a female athlete leaves a program led by a female head coach, questions are
asked.
c. End-of-year reviews that contain student athlete complaints or criticisms are used
against female coaches.
d. Most, if not all, complaints or criticisms directed at male coaches are ignored.
The Merger of the Men’s and Women’s Athletic Departments
39.

From 1973 until approximately August 2000, the University of Iowa had separate

men’s and women’s athletic departments.
40.

Dr. Christine Grant served as the first women’s athletic director at the University

of Iowa after the passage of Title IX.
41.

The University of Iowa Women’s Field Hockey field is named after her, in honor

of her contribution to Iowa athletics.2
42.

Dr. Grant worked with the men’s athletic department to make continued progress

for women in athletics, while ensuring the University maintained a high level of competitiveness
for both male and female sports.
43.

Dr. Grant was able to add women’s athletic programs (rowing and soccer) and

supported the coaching methods of female coaches, such as Gayle Blevins, which permitted her
to reach Hall of Fame status in coaching.

2

See http://btn.com/2012/10/12/title-ix-retrospective-profiling-dr-christine-grant/; see also
http://now.uiowa.edu/2014/11/media-advisory-christine-grant-discuss-politics-sport-college-educationnov-11

 44.

During her tenure when women’s sports were being added, the men’s programs

were still able to compete at a high level and were in no way adversely affected by the addition
of female sports.
45.

The cooperation of the two athletic departments permitted women to advance as

the law required and yet permitted a long term plan for success of the men’s programs.
46.

In August 2000, Dr. Christine Grant retired.

47.

In August 2000, a task force was formed to study whether the men’s and women’s

athletic departments could be merged and to determine the impact on women’s athletics.
48.

Aware of the risk to equality for women from the merger, in 2000 the University

of Iowa made a commitment that it would not permit the merged department to adversely affect
the opportunities or progress of women in athletics.
49.

The Merger Memorandum clearly stated that gender equity would remain a

primary priority, and adopted the task force’s recommendation that a male and female
administrator would occupy the top two positions of authority within the department, irrespective
of who held the position of athletic director.3
50.

It was also a condition that cost savings from the merger would be used to expand

opportunities for women to further reduce the inequities.
51.

Subsequently, with the appointment of Bob Bowlsby as Athletic Director, a

female Senior Woman Administrator (“SWA”), Jane Meyer, was hired in 2001 to serve in the
No. 2 capacity.

Thus, if the athletic director was male, then a female Senior Woman Administrator (“SWA”) would
occupy the No. 2 position of power, serving as “chief of staff” or “chief operating officer”, a position
essentially equivalent to a “deputy director”. The converse was also recommended.
3

 52.

From August 2000 until August 2006, the University of Iowa, under the direction

of Bob Bowlsby, generally met these conditions and was committed to achieving gender equity.
53.

In 2006, Gary Barta replaced Bob Bowlsby as the Director of Athletics.

54.

Mr. Barta could have continued down a similar path as Bob Bowlsby and helped

women’s athletics progress.
55.

Instead, Mr. Barta chose to prevent resources from being directed to women’s

sports so that the University could maintain and possibly increase its financial support to the
male sports of football, basketball and wrestling.
56.

Starting around 2008, the Barta administration began to direct more support and

resources to the tier one male sports.
57.

Gary Barta chose to ignore the Merger Memorandum and hired a male to work in

the No. 2 position as Deputy Director.
58.

Gary Barta chose to pay the male administrator over $70,000 more than the

female who previously had that position.
59.

The decision by the Barta administration to stop the need for “continued progress”

as required by Title IX constitutes a gender-based violation of the Iowa Civil Rights Act.
Evidence of Removing Similar Female Coaches Because of Gender and/or Sexual
Orientation
60.

From 2006 to 2014, the Barta administration pushed out or fired six highly

qualified female coaches and removed its strongest and most powerful female from
administration.

 61.

After Barta took over as the director of athletics, the department began a pattern

of undermining, intimidating and terminating coaches as well as covering-up violations of the
law to keep resources from women’s programs.
62.

In December 2007, the first of the six females, Cindy Fredrick, was pushed out of

University of Iowa athletics when the Barta administration terminated her as the women’s
volleyball coach.
63.

The excuse used to remove Coach Fredrick was her record and player complaints.

64.

Regarding her record it is important to note the following:
a. Coach Fredrick inherited a poorly supported volleyball program when she arrived
at Iowa, as evidenced by the lack of a separate floor for volleyball.
b. Prior to coming to Iowa, Coach Fredrick had success in turning around women’s
volleyball programs.
c. Coach Fredrick was only given four seasons to turn around the volleyball
program; the University of Iowa’s position is that it generally takes approximately
seven years to turn around a program.
d. Coach Fredrick was not given the resources to turn her program around.4

Athletic Director Barta handed the women’s volleyball program to a male after firing two women who
coached without the benefit of a separate volleyball floor. There is other evidence of support for the male
volleyball coach including marketing efforts that show that administration did not really get behind the
program until a male was put in charge, as well as the fact that the University paid the male coach
substantially more than the two females. The same disparity occurred in the rowing program. Rowing
Coach Kowal was removed and replaced with a male coach. When her male replacement left voluntarily,
he was replaced with another man.
4

 65.

Coach Fredrick also challenged the administration regarding equal distribution of

resources for women’s sports and questioned the University’s practice of elevating the
importance of complaints from female student athletes.
66.

In 2010, Larissa Libby, gymnastics coach, publicly challenged these same issues

(lack of support and problems with facilities).
67.

After this challenge, the female gymnastics coach was brought in, chastised, and

told to “not do that again” or risk termination.5
68.

During the 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 seasons, Hall of Fame softball coach Gayle

Blevins was not supported by the University of Iowa when a male assistant coach undermined
her authority with her players.6.
69.

In addition, a female player’s parent made a public challenge to Coach Blevins.

70.

Coach Blevins understood that the University would not support her in response

to this parent’s complaint.
71.

As a result of the University of Iowa Administration’s actions and lack of support,

coach Blevins retired in June of 2010.7
72.

On or about June 15, 2011, the University of Iowa terminated women’s golf

coach, Kelly Crawford.
5

See generally http://www.hawkeyesports.com/sports/w-gym/mtt/larissa_libby_233112.html.
Studies show that a male hired to be an assistant to a female coach or who is a peer of a female coach,
may have doubts about the decisions of the female coach. These doubts are normally powered by gender
stereotypes. See Burton, Borland, Mazerolle – “They cannot seem to get past the gender issue”:
Experiences of young female athletic trainers in NCAA Division I intercollegiate athletics, Sports
Management Review 15, p. 304-317 (2012) (“male coaches of male sports perpetuated a stereotype of
female incompetence in the male domain of sport by continually challenging the professional decisions of
our participants.”)
7
In her 31 years as a head coach, Blevins compiled a record of 1,245 wins, 588 losses and 5 ties. At the
time of her retirement, Blevins was the second-winningest softball coach in NCAA Division
I history. She never had a losing season.
6

 73.

Initially, the alleged reasons for her termination were “poor reviews” by the

players.
74.

When Coach Crawford challenged this, the reason given to her to justify her

termination was changed to the commonly used excuse of her “record.” Records for male
coaches in baseball, track and tennis were not similarly scrutinized.
75.

Coach Crawford’s termination was unlike the men’s programs that had poor

records (baseball, track and tennis), because those male coaches were normally not fired or if
terminated had been provided more time to turn programs around.
a. As with Coach Fredrick, Coach Crawford had a strong history of coaching or
developing programs prior to coming to Iowa.8
b. As with Coach Fredrick, Coach Crawford was not given seven years to turn
around her program as she was fired after five years (2006-2011).9
c. While replaced by a female, Coach Crawford eventually learned that the real
reason she was being removed was to make way to replace her with a male coach,
Mark Hankins. Mr. Hankins was going to be offered the job to coach both men
and women’s golf.
d. The plan to replace the female coach with a male was sidelined after the female
student athletes reported that they did not want to play for Mr. Hankins given his
treatment of the male players.

8

Coach Crawford was the first head golf coach at UC Irvine and led the program for six years. During
that short time she led that program to a No. 13 ranking in the country.
9
Coach Crawford was also told by the Barta Administration, specifically by administrator Fred Mims,
that “she was not going to be able to turn the program around.”

 e. Unlike the investigations launched into the behavior of female coaches based on
athlete complaints, Athletic Director Barta did not investigate these complaints
about the male golf coach. Instead, he continued to support Mr. Hankins including
providing Mr. Hankins with a promotion to the postion of assistant to the athletic
director on August 5, 2014, the day after Coach Griesbaum was terminated.
f. Prior to this time, Mr. Hankins had been provided a number of other privileges
denied to female coaches including; a) not being investigated for player
complaints; b) being permitted to engage in fundraising for his program; c) being
permitted to purchase an expensive travel van denied to female programs; and d)
being allowed to challenge administration in a manner denied to female coaches.
76.

In May 2012, the University of Iowa removed rowing coach Mandi Kowal.

77.

During her career, Coach Kowal was expected to compete without access to key

facilities, such as a boathouse.
78.

After working hard to obtain a boathouse, she was removed and replaced with a

male coach.
79.

A female student athlete complained about training while injured. The complaint

was enabled by the gender stereotypes of administration and used against Coach Kowal.
80.

After Coach Kowal was fired in part for the athlete complaint, the coaching

methods of the male rowing coach who replaced her were objectively more aggressive than
methods used by Coach Kowal.
81.

In January 2014, the University of Iowa removed the women’s volleyball coach

Sharon Dingman.

 82.

Coach Dingman was removed after advocating for resources and she was replaced

by a man who was given more pay and increased support.
83.

As with Coach Fredrick and Coach Crawford, Coach Dingman had success prior

to coming to the University of Iowa.
84.

Coach Dingman was finally able to obtain a new floor for volleyball but was then

fired before she had any real chance to take advantage of it.
85.

Since leaving the University of Iowa, Coach Dingman has been nominated for

coach of the year.
86.

In addition to paying the male coach of the volleyball team more than the female

coach, Defendants also pay the women’s basketball coach substantially less than the men’s
basketball coach for performing similar work.10
Tracey Griesbaum Was Improperly Fired
87.

The next discriminatory removal of a female coach by the Barta Administration

occurred with the termination of the Plaintiff, Tracey Griesbaum on August 4, 2014.
88.

Coach Griesbaum had been at Iowa for 22 years, 14 of which she served as head

89.

Coach Griesbaum maintained a competitive program including leading the team

coach.

to three Big Ten Tournament Championships, one regular season Big Ten Championship, six
NCAA Tournament appearances, and the 2008 NCAA Final Four.

Defendants will likely try to use women’s basketball as an example to say that female programs are not
receiving less than male programs and also distinguish women’s basketball as a tier one sport. Despite
Defendants’ misplaced effort, there is no reason that the coach of the women’s basketball team should be
paid hundreds of thousands of dollars less than the coach of the men’s basketball team. The differences in
pay for men’s and women’s basketball coaches after 2009 are a direct violation of Iowa’s equal pay
provision under the Iowa Civil Rights Act.
10

 90.

Coach Griesbaum has been an example to all coaches, male and female, in the

area of proper and effective coaching methods.
91.

In the course of leading a successful, highly competitive field hockey program,

Coach Griesbaum received occasional complaints from players and their parents.
92.

In May 2014, an investigation was launched against Coach Griesbaum based on

an anonymous complaint made by the parent of a student athlete.
93.

More than 40 interviews were conducted and no policy violations were found,

still Barta terminated Coach Griesbaum on August 4, 2014.
94.

Coach Griesbaum was terminated because of double standards in coaching.

95.

Coach Griesbaum’s coaching methods were not only proper, they were well

within the standards for Division I athletic programs, and commended by Athletic Director
Barta.
Tracey Griesbaum Was Targeted and Fired for Illegal Reasons
96.

Consistent with this pattern of terminating female coaches who received player

complaints; on or about April 30, 2014, a female student athlete and/or her parents pressured the
University of Iowa to investigate the coaching methods of Tracey Griesbaum.
97.

Coach Griesbaum was accused of conduct described as “bullying,” “verbal

harassment,” and “intimidation.”11
98.

The University of Iowa’s reaction to the complaint reveals the gender-based

double standard in place when receiving female student athlete complaints compared with male
student athlete complaints.
11

See University of Iowa Athletics Department Memo from Gary Barta to Tracey Griesbaum dated July
11, 2014.

 99.

Coach Griesbaum is not known for yelling, screaming or intimidating players.

100.

There is no evidence that Coach Griesbaum ever used foul or abusive language.

101.

The vast majority of Coach Griesbaum’s former players confirmed during the

investigation that she was fair and fostered a healthy environment for the student athletes both on
and off the field.
102.

The investigation concluded that Coach Griesbaum did not violate any University

of Iowa policies.
103.

Despite the investigation exonerating Coach Griesbaum, Gary Barta still used his

own biases and stereotypes about how women should coach compared to men and instructed
Coach Griesbaum to change her coaching methods.
104.

Coach Griesbaum stood firm that she had done nothing wrong and that changing

her coaching methods would hurt the field hockey program.
105.

Coach Griesbaum refused to succumb to gender stereotypes and being held to a

different standard than males.
106.

Gary Barta would never have instructed a male coach to make changes after a

report exonerated them.
107.

Coach Griesbaum was fired a few days later on August 4, 2014.

108.

There is no male coach who has been fired because of a student athlete’s

complaint.
109.

There are numerous videos of male coaches using foul language, screaming at

athletes, throwing objects and being ejected from games.

 110.

On January 26, 2011, 13 male athletes were hospitalized after what was described

as a punitive workout.
111.

The male coaches responsible for the workout are still secure in their positions.

112.

Despite the fact that a lawsuit was filed and settled against the University of Iowa

for a documented injury to a football player, Defendants have supported, provided raises, and
otherwise honored the strength and conditioning coach who was found to have overworked and
exposed the student athlete to substantial physical harm.
113.

Under the current administration, the behavior of male coaches has not warranted

investigations let alone discipline or termination.
114.

Overreacting to a female student athlete concern against a female coach while

ignoring the physical risks of harm to male players who similarly complain about male coaches
is gender discrimination.
115.

Had Tracey Griesbaum been a male with the same coaching methods, skills and

winning record, she would not have been investigated or terminated.
The Barta Administration Discrimination Based on Refusal to Investigate
116.

On multiple occasions, Coach Griesbaum requested that the Defendants simply

investigate the extent to which her gender or sexual orientation were a factor in the decisions that
led to her termination.
117.

Despite the Defendants having policies that complaints of discrimination will be

investigated, not one person or department within the University investigated her concerns.
118.

University of Iowa administration is aware or should be aware of the very high

risks of stereotype or gender bias that place female coaches and student athletes at risk:

 a. The University should be aware that female players and parents of female players
will report behavior of female coaches differently (more frequently and for less
risk of physical harm) than male players or parents of male players will report on
the behavior of a male coach.12
b. University of Iowa administration is aware or should be aware that players of any
gender, and parents of any athlete, will hold women in leadership (coaching)
positions to higher standards than they place on men in leadership positions.
c. University of Iowa administration is aware or should be aware that male and
female players and parents of male and female players will hold female leaders
more responsible for the emotional reactions of young student athletes (such as
“she was mean to me,” “she is intimidating,” or “I feel bad about myself”) and yet
not hold male leaders responsible in the same way.
119.

University of Iowa administration is aware or should be aware that male student

athletes are discouraged from reporting emotional upset resulting from the behavior of male
coaches and are discouraged from reporting risk of physical harm based on the behavior of male
coaches.
120.

Denial and refusal to investigate the risk of gender and/or sexual orientation bias

is itself evidence of such bias.
121.

From September 2014 through December 2015, the Barta administration was

provided multiple opportunities to investigate whether gender bias had influenced the process

12 Morrongiello, B. A., & Zdzieborski, D., Normand, J., (2010) Understanding gender differences in
children’s risk taking and injury: A comparison of mothers’ and fathers’ reactions to sons and daughters
misbehaving in ways that lead to injury, Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 31 322-329, p.
328. (internal citations omitted).

 that led to the removal of Tracey Griesbaum and whether sexual orientation had been a factor.
The requests for investigation and reconsideration came from multiple interests and stakeholders
including:
a. Coach Griesbaum, who on at least three occasions asked for investigation from
the Defendants.
b. Several student athletes who were members of the 2014 field hockey squad.
c. Alumni and parents of current and former student athletes.
d. Former coaches and athletic department staff.
e. Former and current athletic professionals outside of the University of Iowa,
including but not limited to coaches, umpires, athletic trainers, and doctors.
122.

The University of Iowa and Gary Barta failed to investigate any of these concerns

of any of these stakeholders.
Additional Evidence of Sexual Orientation Bias
123.

Coach Griesbaum is a gay woman.

124.

Coach Griesbaum’s personal relationship with her partner, Jane Meyer, was

disclosed to the University of Iowa to ensure they were in compliance with University policy.
125.

Jane Meyer was the SWA and the No. 2 person in the athletic department until her

forced removal and reassignment in December 2014.
126.

Coach Griesbaum did not report to Jane Meyer and there was no oversight by

Jane Meyer of the field hockey program.
127.

The University of Iowa cleared the relationship and indicated it was not in any

way in violation of University policies.

 128.

The University of Iowa also determined that no management plan was needed

because there was no direct reporting structure.
129.

Other familial relationships exist between family members and spouses

throughout the university, including husband/wife teams, father/daughter teams, and sibling
teams.
130.

Many of these other relationships require management plans by the University of

Iowa, but Coach Griesbaum’s relationship did not.
131.

The two most recognizable familial employment relationships in Iowa athletics

are on the football team, where the head coach hired his son as an assistant coach, and the
wrestling team, where the head coach hired his twin brother as associate head coach.
132.

Unlike Coach Griesbaum and her partner’s familial/employment relationship, the

other familial/employment relationships were required to be cleared and subject to a
management plan that required a reporting line change.
133.

Gary Barta did not care about the clearance and held her sexual orientation

against Tracey Griesbaum, just like he had held the sexual orientation against other female
coaches.
134.

Gary Barta has a history of terminating gay female coaches once their

relationships are made public, including after the public adoption of a baby with the wife of the
rowing coach and two months after a volleyball coach announced her marriage to her partner.
135.

Former President Sally Mason made statements to the Des Moines Register

Editorial Board that the University was unaware of Coach Griesbaum’s relationship.

 136.

Former President Mason’s statements speaking on behalf of the University of

Iowa were false.
137.

Regardless of the falsity of the statement, the University of Iowa publicly

admitted that they were holding the relationship with Tracey Griesbaum against her partner, Jane
Meyer.
Post-Employment Retaliation
Punishment of Jane Meyer to Intimidate Tracey Griesbaum - Protected Activity
138.

After Coach Griesbaum challenged the University’s termination and requested

investigation, she was subjected to retaliation with the punishment of her partner, Jane Meyer.
139.

Jane Meyer was removed from the department of athletics on December 5, 2014.

140.

Specifically, Jane Meyer was informed by Gary Barta that due to the threat of

Coach Griesbaum’s lawsuit, Jane Meyer would need to be removed from the department of
athletics.
141.

The University of Iowa retaliated against Tracey Griesbaum for bringing concerns

of gender discrimination, sexual orientation discrimination and retaliation to its attention by
threatening her partner.
142.

The University of Iowa believes and tells its employees that it is permissible to

remove a long-term employee from her position if a family member, partner or spouse has
threatened legal action against the University.
143.

The University of Iowa’s decision to remove Jane Meyer from the University of

Iowa Athletics Department has derailed Jane Meyer’s career.

 144.

Each day that Coach Griesbaum’s partner is kept out of the athletic department

hurts her career in athletics and therefore is intended to and causes harm to Tracey Griesbaum.
145.

The University of Iowa’s removal of Jane Meyer from the athletics department

will discourage anyone from making a complaint of discrimination or retaliation to the
University, particularly a spouse or family member also employed at the University of Iowa.
Retaliation in Future Employment
146.

As a result of the Defendants’ actions in terminating Coach Griesbaum, she has

been unable to obtain employment in a coaching capacity.
147.

Coach Griesbaum has not even been able to obtain a volunteer coaching position

where she would have agreed to work for free, in an effort to get back into athletics.
148.

Gary Barta has influenced future employers to not hire Coach Griesbaum to work

at other universities around the country.
149.

Gary Barta’s actions on behalf of Defendant the University of Iowa has further

derailed Coach Griesbaum’s career.
CAUSES OF ACTION
COUNT I
VIOLATION OF THE IOWA CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
GENDER DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION IN EMPLOYMENT
150.

Plaintiff Tracey Griesbaum re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 149 as if fully set

forth herein.
151.

Under the provisions of Iowa Code Chapter 216, it is unlawful for an employer to

discriminate against an employee on the basis of gender or to retaliate against her for engaging in
activity protected by Chapter 216.

 152.

Defendant’s conduct was a motivating factor in that it has discriminated against

Tracey Griesbaum with respect to failing to treat her equally to male employees, allowing her to
be discriminated against by her supervisor, subjecting her to different and heightened scrutiny,
holding her to different and higher standards, and removing her from her position a few days
after refusing to abide by a request to lower her coaching standards so she could reduce
complaints by student athletes.
153.

Defendants’ decisions to fire Tracey Griesbaum was discriminatory and resulted

in the loss of her career.
154.

After Tracey Griesbaum asked the University of Iowa to investigate her

termination, Defendants retaliated against her in an effort to dissuade her from dropping her civil
rights claims by removing her partner from her long-time position of over 14 years in the athletic
department.
155.

As a proximate result of Defendant’s actions, as outlined above, Tracey

Griesbaum has in the past and will in the future suffer mental and emotional harm, anguish,
humiliation, embarrassment, loss of dignity, lost wages and benefits, and lost earning capacity.
COUNT II
VIOLATION OF THE IOWA CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
SEXUAL ORIENTATION DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION IN
EMPLOYMENT

156.

Tracey Griesbaum re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 155 as if fully set forth herein.

157.

Under the provisions of Iowa Code Chapter 216, it is unlawful for an employer to

discriminate against an employee on the basis of sexual orientation or to retaliate against her for
engaging in activity protected by Chapter 216.

 158.

Defendant’s conduct was a motivating factor in that it has discriminated against

Tracey Griesbaum with respect to failing to treat her equally to heterosexual employees,
allowing her to be discriminated against, 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 Chapter 216, in violation of Chapter 216.
159.

After Tracey Griesbaum made her sexual orientation more public, she was

discriminated against in the terms and conditions of her employment.
160.

After Tracey Griesbaum asked Defendants to investigate whether she was being

discriminated against, her partner was removed from her long-time position in retaliation.
161.

As a proximate result of Defendant’s actions, as outlined above, Tracey

Griesbaum has in the past and will in the future suffer mental and emotional harm, anguish,
humiliation, embarrassment, loss of dignity, physical harm, lost wages and benefits, lost earning
capacity, and career derailment.

COUNT III
VIOLATION OF THE IOWA CIVIL RIGHTS ACT
GENDER AND SEXUAL ORIENTATION DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION
ON THE BASIS OF EDUCATION
162.

Plaintiff repleads paragraphs 1 through 161 as if set forth herein.

163.

The University of Iowa is an “educational institution” within the meaning of

section 216.9 of the Iowa Code.
164.

Tracey Griesbaum refused to provide her student athletes a lesser experience

because Gary Barta did not want her to coach her team in any manner other than one that would
not generate one concern by a student athlete.

 165.

This standard was never applied to any male coaches.

166.

As a proximate result of the University of Iowa’s actions, Tracey Griesbaum has

in the past and will in the future suffer injuries and damages set forth above.
RELIEF REQUESTED FOR COUNTS I, II AND III:

WHEREFORE, for Counts I, II and III, Plaintiff Tracey Griesbaum respectfully requests
the Court grant the following relief:
A.

Grant equitable relief in the form of orders requiring Defendant to do the

following:
i. Refrain from engaging in any employment practice which
discriminates on the basis of gender or sexual orientation and violates Chapter
216; and
ii. Engage in a multi-sport investigation into the coaching practices and
methods used by male and female coaches. Create a standard and accepted
coaching methods handbook that shall be applied to all coaches regardless of
gender or sexual orientation.
iii. Provide implicit bias training and monitoring to prevent the
operation of bias or stereotypes impacting female coaches in hiring, assessment
of coaching methods, pay, performance, investigations or termination.
iv. Provide training regarding how to effectively avoid engaging in
educational discriminatory practices and to report to the court once every six
months for a period of three years on the training provided and on its
effectiveness; and
v. Require that all disciplinary, demotion and hiring decisions
regarding its employees be reviewed by outside legal counsel for compliance
with Iowa laws and regulations prior to implementation; and
vi. Monitor the workplace environment to assure that employees are not
being treated differently in the department of athletics and report annually to the
court for a period of three years on its monitoring; and

 vii. Test and evaluate supervisory employees to assure that they do not
exhibit or act upon biased attitudes and opinions, do not tolerate disparate
treatment, and report annually to the court for a period of three years on its
testing and evaluating.

B.

Order Defendants to make Tracey Griesbaum whole by awarding her lost

earnings and the value of her lost benefits.
C.

Order the reinstatement of Tracey Griesbaum to her former position as the head

coach of women’s field hockey.
D.

Order Defendants to make Tracey Griesbaum whole by providing compensation

for non-pecuniary losses, including without limitation, emotional distress, mental anguish, pain
and suffering, inconvenience, humiliation and the loss of the enjoyment of life;
E.

Award Tracey Griesbaum, against Defendant, a judgment for her reasonable

attorney fees and costs pursuant to Chapter 216;
F.

Award pre-judgment interest, against Defendant, as allowed by law; and

G.

Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper.
JURY DEMAND

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Tracey Griesbaum, and hereby requests a trial by jury in the
above-captioned matter.
NEWKIRK ZWAGERMAN, P.L.C.
___/s/ Thomas Newkirk_____
Thomas Newkirk AT0005791
tnewkirk@newkirklaw.com
Jill M. Zwagerman AT0000324
jzwagerman@newkirklaw.com
515 E. Locust Street, Suite 300
Des Moines, IA 50309
Telephone: 515-883-2000
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF