Call The Right Attorney™
No Fee Guarantee

Being Fired For Lying Is Not Race Discrimination Nor Retaliation

by | Jul 25, 2024 | Employment Discrimination, Employment Law, Race Discrimination, Retaliation, Wrongful Termination |

As our employment discrimination lawyers have covered before, allegations of race/color discrimination and retaliation will not protect bad employees from being fired. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently gave us another example in Jeter v. Roberts, No. 22-13983, 2024 WL 507183 (11th Cir. Feb. 9, 2024). LaNitra Jeter, an African American woman, joined the Jefferson County DA’s Office as a Victim Services Officer (“VSO”) in April 2019. However, as early as September of the same year, concerns about her job performance began to surface. Michael McCurry, the DA Office’s chief administrator, noticed a pattern of frequent absences by LaNitra. By September 19, 2023, she had exhausted all 40 hours of her sick leave, all 40 hours of her vacation leave, and 62 hours of her 66.75 hours of comp time. This raised eyebrows among her superiors, who suspected that she might be exploiting the office’s comp time policy. But it wasn’t just her absenteeism that caught their attention. LaNitra was also observed sleeping during trial observations and leaving the building without following proper procedures. This raised concerns about her reliability and dedication to her job.

One incident particularly highlighted the concerns about her honesty. On September 16, 2019, LaNitra claimed she took comp time to attend a mediation involving her husband and his ex-wife in a domestic relations case. She recounted a dramatic altercation where she was handcuffed by a bailiff until she calmed down. However, investigations revealed that there was no such mediation on that date. The judge and mediator involved confirmed that LaNitra’s story was entirely fabricated. Now, as an aside, I’m not sure how much better it would have been if the lie was true – that a person employed to work in a court needed to be tackled and cuffed for getting violent in a court.

So, when COVID came and staff reductions were required, LaNitra was fired. She chose to represent herself and sued for wrongful termination based on race and retaliation.

Best Wrongful Termination Lawyer Blogs on Point:

Without direct evidence, how do you prove race discrimination under Title VII?

To prove race discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 without direct evidence, an individual typically needs to establish a prima facie case by showing:

  1. They belong to a protected racial group.
  2. They were qualified for the job.
  3. They suffered an adverse employment action (like termination or demotion).
  4. Similarly situated employees of a different race were treated more favorably or the fired employee was replaced by an employee outside the protected class.

Once the employee presents such prima facie evidence, the burden shifts to the employer to provide a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the action. The individual must then demonstrate that the reason provided is pretextual, and that race was the actual motivating factor behind the adverse action.

When faced with proving the prima facie case and being unable to point to any similarly situated employees that engaged in the same type of conduct, LaNitra chose not to oppose the motion to dismiss her race claim.

Best Race Discrimination Attorney Blogs on Point:

Without direct evidence, how do you prove retaliation under Title VII?

Under Title VII, it’s illegal for an employer to retaliate against an employee for either opposing any unlawful practice covered by the law or for making a charge or participating in a proceeding under it. To prove retaliation under Title VII without direct evidence, employees typically need to present evidence that:

  1. They engaged in protected activity (such as filing a discrimination complaint or opposing discrimination or racial harassment).
  2. The employer knew about the protected activity.
  3. They suffered an adverse employment action (like termination or demotion).
  4. There was a causal connection between the protected activity and adverse action.

The causal element in retaliation cases can be proven by temporal proximity, which means showing a close timing between the protected activity and the adverse employment action. This close timing suggests a link between the two events and strengthens the argument that the adverse action was taken in retaliation for the protected activity. However, temporal proximity alone may not always be sufficient, and additional evidence may be needed to establish a causal connection conclusively.

The only evidence of causation offered by LaNitra was that she complained about race discrimination slightly over four months before her termination. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that this was not enough to maintain her retaliation claim:

If there is a substantial delay between the protected activity and the adverse action, however, the retaliation claim fails as a matter of law absent any other evidence showing causation. Id. We have held that standing alone, “[a] three to four month disparity between the statutorily protected expression and the adverse employment action is not enough” to establish causation. Thomas v. Cooper Lighting, Inc., 506 F.3d 1361, 1364 (11th Cir. 2007). Nevertheless, the causation element of a prima facie case may still be established if a party “present[s] evidence from which a reasonable jury could find” that a causal connection existed between the protected activity and the adverse action. Id.

Id. at *3.

Moreover, when the employer pointed to her lies and dishonesty as well as the need to reduce staff during COVID, LaNitra failed to present evidence of pretext. As a result, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of her retaliation claim.

Best Workplace Retaliation Law Firm Blogs on Point:

Why is it important to hire the best employment law attorney to fight my wrongful termination claim?

It’s essential to hire a top-notch employment law attorney for your wrongful termination claim because they possess specialized skill in this complex legal area. With in-depth knowledge and experience, the best lawyers can craft a strategic approach tailored to the specifics of your case. These attorneys are adept at advocating for your rights, whether it involves negotiating with your employer, representing you in hearings, or presenting your case in court.

When considering which firm to choose, Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm stands out for several reasons. First, they focus exclusively on representing employees in employment law matters, ensuring they have a deep understanding of the nuances involved. Additionally, their reputation for achieving successful outcomes and prioritizing client needs is well-established in the legal community. Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm takes a client-centered approach, providing personalized attention and keeping you informed throughout the legal process. Their results-oriented mindset means they are committed to securing the best possible outcome for your case. With their extensive resources and network of contacts, they are well-equipped to handle even the most challenging wrongful termination claims effectively.

Best Employee’s Rights Lawyer Blogs on Point:

Disclaimer:

The content provided on this race discrimination, wrongful termination and retaliation blog is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as employment legal advice. The employment discrimination information presented here is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. While we endeavor to provide accurate and up-to-date information, any reliance you place on such information is strictly at your own risk. We strongly recommend consulting with the best employment attorney in your jurisdiction for advice specific to your situation.