With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". claim of disparate treatment is that she was removed or excluded from a number of committees in favor of non-Black administrators, including Paul Dale. Specifically, Plaintiff contends that she was excluded from a position on the 1998-1999 PVCC Cultural Diversity Committee (“Diversity Committee”). Placement on the 1998-99 Diversity Committee is the only contested committee assignment that is not time-barred. In contrast to her allegations about office location and signage, Plaintiff presents sufficient evidence to show that exclusion from committee assignments could constitute an adverse action. Plaintiffs supervisors have indicated that committee work was a “building block” upon which Plaintiff could reasonably expect her future advancement to depend. See Bryson, 96 F.3d at 916-7 (<HOLDING>). Specifically, when Plaintiff asked Kranitz

A: holding that a lateral transfer without a loss in benefits does not constitute an adverse employment action
B: recognizing that a set of actions may constitute an adverse employment action when considered collectively even though some actions do not rise to the level of an adverse employment action individually
C: holding that a transfer of job duties can constitute an adverse employment action
D: holding loss of committee work may constitute adverse action
D.