Award in Sex Bias Case Raised to $17.6 Million : * Litigation: Jurors said the sum was meant to punish and make an example of Texaco.

A Superior Court jury on Thursday awarded a Los Angeles woman $15 million in punitive damages in a sex discrimination case against Texaco Refining & Marketing Inc., bringing her total award up to a record $17.6 million.

Legal experts said the award was the largest ever granted to an individual in a sex discrimination case. It was meant to punish Texaco and make an example of the company, jurors said Thursday, after deciding in favor of Janella Sue Martin, a 48-year-old credit supervisor who sued the company in 1986.

The $17.65-million award included the $15 million in punitive damages and $2.65 million in compensatory damages, which were awarded Wednesday. Punitive damages are intended as punishment for intentional or reckless wrongdoing. Compensatory damages cover actual economic loss and other intangible damage suffered by the plaintiff in a case.

“We wanted to set an example against Texaco, and if we gave $1 million it would be like $1 to them,” said Rod Hoard, jury foreman. “I think they had better open up their eyes to discrimination. They may say they don’t discriminate, but I think that’s just words.”

Martin, who has worked in Texaco’s western region since 1984, alleged in her suit that Texaco Refining & Marketing Inc., a subsidiary of Texaco Inc., passed her over for promotions when managerial positions were created, causing her to suffer emotionally and to earn less money than the men who got the jobs.

“I feel wonderful, I feel vindicated and I feel good for all the women at Texaco who are going to benefit from this, and for all the women who are yet to be hired at Texaco who will benefit from this,” said Martin, who said she plans to keep her job.

Dan Stormer, Martin’s attorney, said he was not surprised by the large judgment.

“They gave the big punitive award because Texaco treats its corporation like a plantation; the white males determine who get what crumbs,” Stormer said. “In this case, they made the determination that there would be no women in supervisory positions.”

From 1983 to 1988, Texaco Inc. had only four women out of 3,000 employees in middle management and above, Stormer said, and promoted no women during that period.

Texaco attorneys said Thursday that the company plans to appeal the verdict.

“We’re disappointed with the verdict, and we think it’s excessive,” said Andrew Peterson, a Texaco attorney. “We don’t think it is in conformance with the facts that developed in the case or the law with respect to employment and discrimination.”

Martin, who had previously worked as a credit supervisor in Texaco’s Houston office, came to Los Angeles in 1984 on the promise that the company would promote her to the position of credit manager. The promotion never occurred; instead, several jobs that Martin applied for were given to less qualified men, she said in her case.

Last month, the jury found the Texaco subsidiary guilty of sex discrimination and false inducement. The jury also found Texaco guilty of retaliating against Martin after she filed her suit against the company.

“The retaliation began when her supervisor from Houston physically threatened her after she told him she planned to sue in Aug. 19, 1985,” Stormer said. “She was also totally ostracized from her co-workers in the management level. They wouldn’t talk to her.”

Stormer introduced into testimony during the trial that Martin’s managers prevented her from supervising her employees. On one occasion, when an employee was sexually harassed, Martin’s managers would not let her punish the harassing worker, Stormer said.

“They admitted Janella Martin is a hard-working, loyal employee, yet they prevented her from doing her job after she filed the suit,” Stormer said.

Stormer also used testimony from a Harvard psychologist, who said Martin suffered from dysthymia, a form of depression with side effects that include mood and weight swings and forgetfulness.

The psychologist testified that Martin lost about 50% of her capacity to function as a result of Texaco’s discriminatory promotional practices.

Gloria Allred, who represents sex discrimination plaintiffs, hailed the judgment as a victory for all women and said she had never heard of a judgment so large.

“It sends a message not only to business but also to women employees, that sex discrimination will be taken very seriously by the courts,” Allred said. “Sex discrimination used to be thought of as a laughing matter, and with this type of judgment employers won’t be laughing anymore,”

Glenn Rothner, who represents labor unions and individual employees, said he believes that the large punitive judgment sends a message to employers that the public does not tolerate sex discrimination in the workplace.

“I think it also demonstrates that the public at large, including those who sit on juries, just won’t tolerate this kind of discrimination anymore,” Rothner said. “This case is part of a trend in the area of discrimination on the basis of sex and other forms of violation of individual rights. The trend is that juries will expect the perpetrators of discrimination to accept the consequences.”