Former Waffle House Cook Alleges Sexual Harassment and Employer Neglect

In a troubling case that highlights ongoing workplace harassment issues, former Waffle House cook Marilyn Smith has filed a federal lawsuit against the restaurant chain, claiming she was essentially forced to resign due to persistent sexual harassment by her supervisor. Smith, who began working as a grill operator in July 2024 at a South Carolina location, alleges that her male supervisor repeatedly groped her despite her clear objections. According to court documents obtained by The Independent, the harassment began just months into her employment and involved the supervisor regularly grabbing her buttocks while they worked together. What makes this case particularly disturbing is not just the alleged harassment itself, but the company’s reported response—or lack thereof—to Smith’s attempts to address the situation through proper channels.

When faced with this inappropriate behavior, Smith did what employees are typically advised to do—she reported the incidents to higher management. According to her lawsuit, she made multiple complaints to the restaurant’s district manager about the unwanted touching and harassment. However, instead of investigating her claims or taking protective measures, Smith alleges that her concerns were completely ignored. This dismissal of her complaints reportedly only emboldened her supervisor, whose inappropriate behavior allegedly escalated after she sought help from management. The situation deteriorated to the point where Smith felt she had no choice but to leave her job less than seven months after being hired, especially after the company allegedly disciplined her rather than addressing the behavior of her harasser. The legal filing characterizes her departure as a “constructive discharge,” a term indicating that while she technically resigned, the working conditions had become so intolerable that her resignation could not be considered truly voluntary.

Matthew King, Smith’s attorney from North Charleston, provided context that suggests this case may represent a broader pattern of workplace misconduct and corporate response. “Ms. Smith’s case, unfortunately, is indicative of the type of harassment and conduct imposed on females in the workplace,” King told The Independent. His statement points to how Smith’s experience might reflect systemic issues affecting many women in similar work environments. King further noted that the case also demonstrates “the protect-the-company mindset of managers and human resources employees that many hourly workers are not aware of.” This observation highlights a troubling dynamic where companies may prioritize avoiding liability or protecting their reputation over addressing legitimate employee concerns and ensuring a safe, respectful workplace. Despite these challenges, Smith is moving forward with her legal action not only to seek justice for herself but also, according to her attorney, “in hopes that others will not be forced to endure what she did.”

The financial aspects of Smith’s lawsuit reflect both the concrete economic impact of losing her job and the emotional toll the alleged harassment took on her. Having earned at least $10 per hour at Waffle House, Smith is seeking various forms of compensation, including back pay for wages lost since her departure, front pay to cover future lost income, and associated employment benefits. Beyond these tangible losses, the lawsuit also pursues compensatory and punitive damages, acknowledging that the harm caused extends well beyond simply lost wages. Notably, Smith is specifically requesting a monetary judgment for “embarrassment and humiliation,” recognizing the psychological impact of experiencing persistent harassment in a professional environment and having her complaints dismissed by those in positions of authority.

This case brings into sharp focus several critical workplace issues that continue to affect employees across industries. Sexual harassment remains a persistent problem in many work environments, particularly in service industries where power dynamics between supervisors and staff can be especially pronounced. When employees like Smith encounter harassment, they face multiple challenges: the immediate discomfort and violation of the harassment itself, the stress of deciding whether to report the behavior, and the potential for retaliation or dismissal of their concerns if they do come forward. When companies fail to take reports seriously or, worse, punish those who report harassment, it creates a chilling effect that can discourage other victims from speaking up, potentially allowing problematic behaviors to continue unchecked throughout an organization.

As Smith’s case moves through the legal system, it serves as an important reminder of both individual courage and systemic challenges. By taking legal action against a large corporation, Smith demonstrates the importance of standing up against workplace misconduct even when internal reporting mechanisms fail. However, her experience also highlights how much work remains to be done in creating truly safe and respectful workplaces. While companies increasingly have anti-harassment policies in place, the effectiveness of these policies depends entirely on how seriously complaints are taken and how thoroughly they are investigated. Smith’s allegations suggest that having policies on paper is insufficient if management is unwilling to enforce them when complaints arise. As of the report’s publication, Waffle House had not responded to requests for comment on the lawsuit, leaving their perspective on these serious allegations unknown as the legal process unfolds.