Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Employment — reverse racial discrimination — direct and indirect methods of proof

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//March 12, 2012//

Employment — reverse racial discrimination — direct and indirect methods of proof

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//March 12, 2012//

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals

Civil

Employment — reverse racial discrimination — direct and indirect methods of proof

Where a plaintiff argues that three co-employees of different races or ethnicities were allowed to take demotions rather than receive corrective discipline for their deficient performance but she was not, and where she also argues that the employer provided inconsistent reasons for departing from its demotion policy in her case, she has nonetheless failed to satisfy her burden using either the direct or indirect methods, and summary judgment for the employer was appropriate.

“…Good has presented evidence that three similarly situated, non-white co-workers received better treatment when they were permitted to take demotions from their managerial roles, yet Good, who is white, was terminated from her position as a supervisor. Under the direct method, however, we cannot conclude that Good’s disparate treatment was racially motivated without evidence pointing more directly to a discriminatory motive without reliance on speculation. See Cerutti, 349 F.3d at 1061. Nothing in this record indicates that UCMC was motivated to terminate Good because of her race. Good has not presented evidence that anyone at UCMC had an anti-white bias, nor has she presented evidence that UCMC has a history of discrimination against white people. She cannot, for example, point to a formal or informal affirmative action policy in her workplace that might have required or encouraged UCMC to deviate from its demotion policy in her case because of her race. She never heard any anti-white slurs or jokes in the workplace, be they ‘stray remarks’ or not. In addition, the undisputed facts show that Good’s position was filled by another white person. In this reverse race discrimination case, the requisite ‘mosaic’ from which a reasonable jury might conclude that UCMC was motivated to terminate Good based on her race is simply not in the evidence.”

As for her argument that she presented a prima facie case under the indirect, burden-shifting method, “[w]e agree with the district court that Good has not offered evidence of any fishy ‘background circumstances’ from which a reasonable finder of fact could conclude that UCMC was motivated by improper, racially-based motives when it terminated her employment rather than demoting her.”

Affirmed.

11-2679 Good v. University of Chicago Medical Center

Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, Guzman, J., Hamilton, J.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests