Sheesh. I would think so!
Here's a story for you:
Some investors bought an apartment complex in Houston with the plan to fix it up and flip it. They decided the Property Manager wasn't doing a good job, so they fired her and promoted her underling to Property Manager. The underling (we'll call her Magali because that's actually her name) was a U.S. citizen who was born in Mexico. She was also a female. Probably still is.
Magali started in her new role on January 1, 2012. Shortly afterward, the owners hired someone (a woman) to supervise Magali. The new supervisor had concerns almost immediately about Magali's job performance and started looking to replace her.
The replacement (also a woman) was hired in March 2012, and two weeks later, Magali was fired. Magali went to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the EEOC felt strongly enough about her case that they decided to sue the company that owned the complex and the company that managed it for national origin and sex (pregnancy) discrimination. But in 2019, U.S. District Court Judge Lynn Hughes issued a four-page decision granting summary judgment to the companies. According to Judge Hughes, Magali was clearly a lousy performer, and her supervisor and replacement were both female, just like Magali, meaning that Magali wasn't discriminated against because of her sex. A few inappropriate comments were allegedly made about Mexicans, but they were "stray remarks" that didn't have anything to do with Magali's termination, so no big deal.
This week, a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the summary judgment decision, which means that the case will go to a jury trial if it doesn't settle.
What went wrong for the employer companies?
Political bias, right? Judge Hughes is a Reagan appointee, and this was a panel of Carter-Clinton-Obama-Biden appointees?
Nope. The three judges on the panel were appointed by George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, and Donald Trump.
So it wasn't politics. But there was a lot more to the EEOC's side of the case. At the summary judgment stage, the courts are supposed to view the evidence in the light most favorable to the party who is not moving for summary judgment. Usually, though not always, that is the plaintiff. In this case it was the EEOC and Magali. The Fifth Circuit panel decided that there was plenty of evidence on the plaintiffs' side to justify sending the case to a jury.
Here's the rest of the story, according to the Fifth Circuit panel:
Remember that the companies wanted to renovate and then flip the apartment complex? Well, apparently one of the problems with the complex in its "as-is" state was that there weren't enough white people there. The owners talked about changing "the demographics," and referred to one tenant as "a trashy Mexican" and another as "a dumb Mexican." According to the Fifth Circuit opinion, one owner "expressed dismay at the fact that the office staff were 'all Mexicans.'"
Gee. That may not bode well for Magali.
It didn't. Magali's supervisor told the EEOC that from the get-go she had been directed by her bosses to start "working toward" terminating Magali. (So this isn't even an "alleged" fact.)
But wait! There's more!
The supervisor was also told "to hire a 'higher class of individual with the look of Ken and Barbie,' which the supervisor understood as a hiring preference for those who are 'petite, attractive, young[,] and Caucasian.'" (Brackets in court's decision.)
Oh! Oh! And that poor performance? Apparently, Magali had actually improved things when she took over as Property Manager in January 2012. And although the supervisor issued a documented warning for poor performance, she apparently didn't issue it to Magali, because it wasn't signed "and was provided while [Magali] was on vacation."
And then there was the pregnancy. One of the owners learned that Magali was pregnant in January 2012. He allegedly "became frustrated and stated that he believed she would take her full Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) entitlement because 'all Mexicans do that.'" (!!!!!!!!!)
And the supervisor allegedly advised Magali to have an abortion. (!!!!!!!!!)*
*Based on Judge Hughes' decision, apparently there was evidence that Magali was the one who wanted to get an abortion. Again, the court had to view the evidence in the light most favorable to Magali.
And wait! There's more!
The supervisor allegedly told the new hire (who became Magali's replacement) that she'd been told to fire Magali because Magali was Hispanic and pregnant.
At this point, you probably feel the way I did. How in tarnation did this employer ever win summary judgment in the first place? Even after having read the lower court's summary judgment decision (linked above), I am scratching my head.
Maybe a lot of this stuff didn't really happen, but -- again -- at the summary judgment stage, the court has to view the evidence in the light most favorable to the EEOC/Magali. That means whenever a fact is disputed, the court is required to assume that Magali's version of the facts is correct.
A jury, on the other hand, can believe whomever it wants. And it looks like they are going to get their chance.
Guess which two letters I never saw in Judge Hughes's opinion or in the Fifth Circuit opinion? (1) H, and (2) R. Someone who could say, "No, no, Honey, you can't do that. That's against the law."
I wouldn't be surprised if a search wasn't in progress already.
Image Credits: Barbie from flickr, Creative Commons license, by Mike Mozart. Other images from Adobe Stock.
- Partner
Robin has more than 30 years' experience counseling employers and representing them before government agencies and in employment litigation involving Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with ...
Robin Shea has 30 years' experience in employment litigation, including Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (including the Amendments Act).
Continue Reading
Subscribe
Contributors
- William A. "Zan" Blue, Jr.
- Obasi Bryant
- Kenneth P. Carlson, Jr.
- James M. Coleman
- Cara Yates Crotty
- Lara C. de Leon
- Christopher R. Deubert
- Joyce M. Dos Santos
- Colin Finnegan
- Steven B. Katz
- Ellen C. Kearns
- F. Damon Kitchen
- David C. Kurtz
- Angelique Groza Lyons
- John E. MacDonald
- Kelly McGrath
- Alyssa K. Peters
- Sarah M. Phaff
- David P. Phippen
- William K. Principe
- Sabrina M. Punia-Ly
- Angela L. Rapko
- Rachael Rustmann
- Paul Ryan
- Piyumi M. Samaratunga
- Robin E. Shea
- Kristine Marie Sims
- David L. Smith
- Jill S. Stricklin
- Jack R. Wallace
Archives
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010