Federal Civilian Employee Brings Race Discrimination, Retaliation and Hostile Work Environment Lawsuit.
In July of 2009, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit decided a case where the Plaintiff alleged race discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment. (See Batuyong v. Gates, 337 Fed Appx 451 (C.A.6 (Ohio))). In Batuyong, the Plaintiff had requested 240 hours of advance sick leave (ASL) for time off following an elective knee surgery that she would have on June 4, 2004. Her first line supervisor recommended that the ASL be approved, but the second line supervisor did not and thus Plaintiff while she was out was considered Leave Without Pay (LWOP) and Away without Leave (AWOL). But, a few months later, the second line supervisor reversed herself and approved the ASL request. Plaintiff was reinstated in good standing and Plaintiff returned to work on August 9, 2004. But, it did not end there. Plaintiff was upset and felt that she was wronged, so she went and found a race discrimination lawyer to help her out.
Plaintiff then filed her complaint because of the initial denials and making her jump through hoops alleging race discrimination and retaliation and hostile work environment. Plaintiff hired a race discrimination lawyer. The Court held that in order to establish a prima facie case of race discrimination Plaintiff must establish, 1) that she is a member of a protected class, 2) that she suffered an adverse employment action, 3) that she was qualified for the position, and 4) that she was treated differently than similarly situated employees who were not members of the protected class. The Court held that only the 4th element was at issue. Plaintiff failed to prove this element. There was no evidence to support this claim and nothing that her race discrimination lawyer could do.
As to Plaintiff’s retaliation claim, she must show that: 1) she engaged in activity protected under Title VII, 2) the defendant knew that she engaged in the protected activity, 3) the defendant subsequently took an adverse, retaliatory action against the plaintiff, or the plaintiff was subjected to severe or pervasive retaliatory harassment by a supervisor, and 4) a causal connection existed between the protected activity and the adverse employment action. Based on the facts Plaintiff and her race discrimination lawyer could not present evidence that Plaintiff had engaged in protected activity that was causally connected to Defendant’s denial of her ASL request.
And finally, as to the hostile work environment claim, Plaintiff must demonstrate that: 1) she is a member of a protected class, 2) she was subject to unwelcome harassment, 3) the harassment was based on her race, 4) the harassment unreasonably interfered with her work performance by creating an environment that was intimidating, hostile, or offensive, and 5) employer liability. Plaintiff alleged that there was some verbal yelling in the past and a denial of travel expenses, but the court held that such actions were not sufficiently severe or pervasive to have constituted a hostile work environment.
If you have been the subject of a Louisville race discrimination matter, please call and speak to a Louisville race discrimination lawyer at the Law Offices of Andrew S. Alitowski at 888-ASK-ANDREW (275-2637) or contact us online. We are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
If you are injured…Ask Andrew!!!