Former WBZ anchor Kate Merrill fires back in new court filings amid discrimination suit

Local News

Merrill, who left her role in 2024 after nearly 20 years at WBZ, claims she was discriminated against on the basis of her gender and her race.

Kate Merrill, the departed WBZ morning anchor who is battling her former employer in court for $4 million, fired back against the station in a new court filing, reaffirming her claim that she was discriminated against as a white woman.

In August, Merrill filed a federal lawsuit in Boston against the station, parent companies CBS and Paramount, two former colleagues, her superior Justin Draper, and Michael Roderick, who, according to the suit, investigated complaints of discrimination at WBZ. Merrill voluntarily dropped her claims against one of the former colleagues, both of whom are Black, in October.

Merrill, who left her role in 2024 after nearly two decades at the station, claims she that she was discriminated against on the basis of her gender and race and that she was defamed after she was accused of racist remarks and demoted. 

A lawyer for WBZ filed a motion in late November to drop four of Merrill’s six charges. In a Jan. 16 motion to oppose, Merrill agreed to drop the untimely payment of wages after WBZ paid her 20 days of accrued, unused vacation days in November.

Merrill’s lawyer, Patricia Washienko, and WBZ’s representation did not return a request for comment Sunday evening. In December, a spokesperson for WBZ said they “refute any claim that WBZ or any of the other named defendants acted unlawfully and will continue to defend the matter in court.”

What happened at WBZ?

The rift at WBZ appears to have begun after Merrill privately corrected Jason Mikell’s on-air pronunciation of “Concord.” Mikell, one of defendants in the suite, is a meteorologist at the station who is Black. He allegedly “confronted Ms. Merrill, loudly yelling at her on the studio floor and asserting that she was being critical of him” in April 2024, the lawsuit said, and Merrill reported the incident to human resources.

She also alleges that Mikell “made an inappropriate sexual innuendo about Ms. Merrill on air. Specifically, he implied that Ms. Merrill and her co-anchor had sexual relations at a gazebo,” the lawsuit said.

Then, both he and another colleague made simultaneous allegations of microaggressions and unconscious bias against Merrill.  Merrill denies that any of her actions “were described or motivated by overt racism or unconscious bias,” according to the lawsuit. She was subsequently demoted to weekend nights, which was “career ending,” the lawsuit alleges.

Motion: Former anchor reaffirms discrimination, defamation claims

In the motion, Merrill argues that “she, a woman, was subjected to disparate treatment in discipline compared to her male peers.” She alleges that Mikell was not disciplined for his comments on-air or on the studio floor.

Mark Batten, lawyer for WBZ, its employees, and its parent companies, previously argued that the defamation claims against Draper, who allegedly publicly announced her demotion to staff, should be dismissed because his statement was true. He only announced her reassignment, Batten argued, which is “far from sufficient to support a defamation claim.”

In her motion, Merrill’s lawyer argues that “taken together, the investigation, demotion and announcement of demotion immediately thereafter attributed racist animus to Ms. Merrill.” She alleges that WBZ and its parent companies acted with actual malice because they “had a corporate agenda and implemented quotas to advance an unlawful corporate purpose: reverse discrimination.”

Merrill also argued against the motion to dismiss all charges of tortious interference against Draper, Roderick, and Mikell. In the motion, Merrill argues that Mikell filed “false and/or misleading” allegations against her, making it not a legally protected complaint, as Batten argued.

If the court agrees with WBZ to dismiss certain counts, Merrill asked for the court to dismiss without prejudice so she can amend her complaint, her lawyer writes. 

Previously, Merrill said in a public statement that it was “with profound sadness that I now find myself in the position of bringing a legal complaint against a station and company that I once considered part of my family.” 

“This decision was not made lightly,” she wrote. “It was made because I believe fairness must apply to everyone, regardless of race, gender, or background and I was not treated fairly.”

Molly Farrar is a general assignment reporter for Boston.com, focusing on education, politics, crime, and more.