They reported their boss. An investigation backed them up. Then they lost their jobs
Three Vanderbilt University employees say they were pushed out after reporting sexual harassment by their supervisor.
A federal lawsuit filed on April 10, 2026, in the Middle District of Tennessee (Berry et al v. Vanderbilt University, Case No. 3:26-cv-00443) lays out a troubling sequence: three women in the university's library system reported a hostile work environment, participated in an investigation that led to their supervisor's termination — and then lost their own jobs.
Regina Berry, Miriam Wnuk, and Rachel Adams all worked in the Logistics and Access Services Department of Vanderbilt's Jean and Alexander Heard Libraries. Berry had been with the university since 1998, Adams since 1991, and Wnuk since 2020. Their supervisor, Scott Martin, who served as the department's director, allegedly made unwanted comments about female employees' bodies and appearance, excluded women from meetings, and refused to hire qualified female candidates.
Berry raised concerns about pay inequity and sexism as early as the summer of 2023, after learning a less experienced male colleague had received a higher percentage raise. She escalated those concerns through several internal channels — her direct supervisor, human resources, and the university's Equal Opportunity and Access Office. According to the lawsuit, the response was underwhelming. The EOA eventually closed her case, and a library HR administrator told her she should only report matters that immediately involved herself — despite Vanderbilt's own policies requiring her, as a mandatory reporter, to flag all such conduct.
Berry then arranged a Title IX training for the library unit in September 2024. That session prompted the Title IX Office to begin looking into her original 2023 concerns for the first time. All three women participated in the ensuing investigation, sitting for multiple interviews spanning several hours, and reported violations of the university's harassment and equal opportunity policies.
According to the filing, the investigation substantiated their claims. Vanderbilt terminated Martin on or about March 7, 2025. But what came next, the lawsuit alleges, was not resolution — it was retaliation.
The department was reorganized. A mother-son pair were placed in leadership roles despite allegedly having less experience and education than the three women. Adams and Wnuk were told to route all faculty correspondence through supervisors who, according to the filing, had no experience performing their day-to-day tasks. Both also received formal warnings that cost them annual merit increases, and in Wnuk's case, blocked her from seeking a promotion for a year.
On or about June 1, 2025, all three women met with the Title IX office to report retaliation. Eight days later, they were placed on administrative leave in what the university described as a reduction in force and escorted out in front of colleagues. Their terminations took effect on August 8, 2025.
The university also allegedly disabled their network accounts, cutting off access to internal job postings — despite having promised them "priority eligibility" for open positions. According to the lawsuit, that priority status did not actually exist in Vanderbilt's application system.
No final determination has been made in the case, and Vanderbilt has not yet responded to the claims.
