Public Hearing Summaries Note: Click on the case title to download the case PDF. Rachelle Morrow vs. Alaska Railroad Corporation Date of Decision: Basis: Race, Sex Resolution: Pending Pubic hearing summary: Complainant, an African American female, alleged she was denied the opportunity to interview for a position with the Alaska Railroad for which she was qualified. Morrow also alleged that the railroad went outside of its hiring process (granting consideration and preference to current employees) and hired an external Caucasian male applicant with fewer qualifications. The railroad asserted that Morrow did not meet the minimum qualifications (MQs) for the position, and that the successful applicant was far more qualified than her. Investigation showed the hiring process was circumvented by an interloping upper management employee with a known history of not wanting women hired into positions he deemed masculine and traditionally held by men. Investigation also revealed that Morrow was qualified to interview, and that both the appropriate hiring managers wanted to interview her but were not given the opportunity because the upper management employee had violated hiring policies, hid her application from one hiring manager, and led the other to believe she would be interviewed even after the vacancy was advertised outside the company in an attempt to attract more applicants. Investigation further showed that Morrow met the MQs, had more experience and qualifications unique to the railroad to justify the hiring managers utilizing the policy for the advancement of company employees. Both hiring managers testified that if Morrow had interviewed with the internal applicants or the external applicants, including the one they selected for the position, they would have selected her for hire. Further, investigation revealed the Alaska Railroad Corporation’s board of directors was aware of and failed to address the manager’s animus and discriminatory behavior toward women. A substantial evidence determination was issued July 18, 2025. Efforts to conciliate failed and the Executive Director issued a certification of conciliation failure on August 11, 2025. An accusation was filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) on September 25, 2025. The railroad filed its answer to the accusation on October 16, 2025. The parties subsequently agreed to engage in alternative dispute resolution, and on October 22, 2025, the matter was assigned to the Office of Administrative Hearings’ alternative dispute resolution process. As of December 31, 2025, the matter is stayed pending mediation.