00-4065 EEOC v. University of Chicago Hospitals

Listen to this article

“After demonstrating constructive discharge, the plaintiff must show that the constructive discharge was motivated by discriminatory intent-in this case, religiously discriminatory intent. See Simpson, 196 F.3d at 877. But contrary to the Chicago Hospitals’ assertions, it is not necessary that the incidents that surround the constructive discharge themselves constitute actionable religious discrimination; instead our focus is whether those incidents, and other supporting evidence, could support the reasonable inference that the alleged constructive discharge was based on religious discrimination. Here again, we believe the EEOC made its case. Borkowicz testified that Shaw had called Leyva a ‘religious fanatic’ and had problems with her ‘religious beliefs and bringing religion into the workplace.’ Furthermore, he testified that Shaw repeatedly stated that she wanted Leyva fired, which he believed was because of Leyva’s religion, attempted to have him fire Leyva, and fired him when he refused. These statements and actions occurred within two months of Leyva’s constructive discharge. Adding this to the other alleged conduct (e.g., the calendar and clock removal, the changes in job evaluation, the repeated accusations of hiring at churches, etc.), we are satisfied that the evidence is sufficient to defeat summary judgment.”

Reversed and Remanded.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Manning, J., Williams, J.