“[T]he summary judgment evidence supports an inference that the [new position] is ‘objectively worse’ than the [original] position . . . .” Petrie, 904 F. Supp. 2d at 584. “Plaintiff further attests that the duties associated with the [new] position were more dangerous than those performed” in his original position. Id. His new duties

“[T]he summary judgment evidence supports an inference that the [new position] is ‘objectively worse’ than the [original] position . . . .” Petrie v. City of Grapevine, 904 F. Supp. 2d 569, 584 (N.D. Tex. 2012). Plaintiff’s original position “operated on a regular Monday-through-Friday schedule, with weekends and holidays off. By contrast, as a

“[Plaintiff] has put forth modest evidence that her job has changed, that she has been excluded from meetings, and that her pay may have been affected. Collectively, these occurrences rise to the level of a Title VII ‘adverse employment action.’” Haire v. Bd. of Supervisors of La. State Univ. Agric. and Mech. Coll., No.

“[Plaintiff] has provided ample conflicting evidence showing a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether the Operations Manager ever had responsibility for supervising Business Services.” Mercer, 2013 WL 164107 at *9. “[Plaintiff] has provided competent summary judgment evidence that she was qualified for the Operations Manager position . . . .” Id. at 10.