Call The Right Attorney™
No Fee Guarantee

What to Look for If You Think You Are Being Discriminated Due to Your Race?

by | Sep 26, 2024 | Employment Discrimination, Employment Law, Race Discrimination, Retaliation |

This blog post looks at the issue of race/color discrimination. Employee’s rights case is Smith v. City of Stow, 2023-Ohio-4302, 229 N.E.3d 1265 (9th Dist.), is an example of racial discrimination within the workplace. In this case an African American police officer, Earl Smith, brought a race discrimination claim against his employer, the City of Stow. Smith alleged that he was subjected to a hostile work environment, discriminatory disciplinary actions, and was passed over for promotions in favor of less qualified White officers. Smith’s complaints to his supervisors and the human resources department were either ignored or inadequately addressed.

This employment discrimination case is a clear case of someone being treated differently than a similarly situated co-worker because of his race. Officer Smith was qualified for the promotion and there was a position available for him, but he was not treated the same as his White counterparts, who had similar experience as Officer Smith. Officer’s Smith story is not rare and happens more than you think. An employer has a duty to make the workplace safe for all employees, and a failure to due so is unacceptable and adverse to Ohio and federal law.

How do you prove race discrimination?

The central legal issue in a race discrimination case centers around if the actions constituted race discrimination in violation of Ohio R.C. § 4112.02(A). An employee would need to establish a prima facie case by demonstrating:

  1. He was a member of a protected class (race),
  2. He was qualified for the job and performing it satisfactorily (the employee had all necessary qualifications and was able to do the job and do it well)
  3. He suffered an adverse employment action (wrongful termination, suspension, change in pay, or change in job duties); and
  4. Similarly situated employees not in the protected class were treated more favorably (another employee not part of the protected class received preferential treatment)

In assessing a race discrimination claim, it is pertinent that the employee is able to show they received their adverse employment action because of them being a part of a protected racial group. Another employee of a different race that was less qualified being given a raise or promotion, or an employees of a specific race being given more difficult job assignments and duties, or comments being made by supervisors concerning an employee’s race are a few examples of how one could show the relation between the adverse action and the employee’s race.

Best Race Discrimination Lawyer Blogs on Point:

How do you prove unlawful retaliation on the job?

In addition to a race discrimination claim, there often is a retaliation claim associated with the discrimination as well. If an employee faces unfair treatment as a result of reporting the discrimination they faced they not only have a race discrimination claim, but a retaliation claim as well. Retaliation claims necessitate proof that:

  1. The employee engaged in a protected activity (complaining about race discrimination),
  2. The employee suffered an adverse employment action, and
  3. There was a causal connection between the protected activity and the adverse action.

In the best retaliation cases, a employee may demonstrate a causal connection through direct evidence or ‘through knowledge coupled with a closeness in time that creates [a]n inference of causation.’” Healey v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 9th Dist. Summit No. 25888, 2012-Ohio-2170, ¶ 19, quoting Meyers v. Goodrich Corp., 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 95996, 2011-Ohio-3261, ¶ 28. “Close temporal proximity between the employer’s knowledge of the protected activity and the adverse employment action alone may be significant enough to constitute evidence of a causal 12 connection—but only if the adverse employment action occurs ‘very close’ in time after an employee learns of a protected activity.” Id.

Best Retaliation Attorney Blogs on Point:

What happened in Smith v. City of Stow?

Earl Smith was an African American police officer. Officer Smith passed the 2014 Sergeant’s exam and displayed a standard of excellence during his tenure with the department. After his passage of the exam, multiple Sergeant positions became available as a few Sergeants from the department began to retire. Two Sergeant positions were filled by Officer Miller and Officer Dirker, two White officers in the department with Sergeant exam scores extremely close to the score of Officer Smith obtained. The third Sergeant position was left vacant and instead of promoting Officer Smith, who had similar qualification as the other White officers. The Chief even acknowledged that Officer Smith was the individual who would be next up to fulfill this role, but the department instead hired new patrol officers and left the role vacant.

The court held that Smith successfully established a prima facie case of discrimination. Smith demonstrated that he was a member of a protected class, he was an African American officer on the force. Smith was qualified for the Sergeant position because he passed the Sergeant’s exam and had an acceptable past work history. Officer Smith was subjected to adverse employment actions by not being given the promotion for a position that was ultimately just left vacant. Similarly situated White officers, Dirker and Miller received more favorable treatment than Officer Smith as they were promoted to the newly vacant positions.

Smith provided evidence suggesting that the city’s reasons were pretextual. The court noted discrepancies in disciplinary records, inconsistent application of policies, and credible testimony about racial biases within the department. This evidence raised genuine issues of material fact regarding whether the city’s actions were motivated by discriminatory intent.

What should you do about a potential race discrimination claim you may have?

What we learn from this case is racial discrimination may persist and show itself in various ways in the workplace. It is not only being called a racial slur or being made fun of because of stereotypes attributed to a specific race. An employer is liable for race discrimination if they fail to treat employees the same and there is a connection between the mistreatment and the employes race. Things like not promoting employes of one race when there is a position available, but promoting employes of another race with similar qualifications is race discrimination. A supervisor assigning undesirable task to a specific employee that said supervisor does not assign to others of a different race is race discrimination. If you are an employee who is part of a protected class, you are qualified, you have any adverse employment action against you, and you are treated differently than employes of a different race; you have experienced race discrimination.

The best thing to do if you are unsure if you are facing discrimination in the workplace is to report any and all events that you feel are contrary to a beneficial work environment. Reporting to HR or a supervisor will serve as you making your employer aware of the mistreatment and failure to cure the wrongful acts places the employer liable for those actions. Reporting also shows that you are doing your part and placing your employer on notice of the wrongful actions occurring at the job.

Keeping a personal log or journal of events that occur so you have a nice timeline of events will always be helpful and allow you to recall events later down the line. Keeping key dates, names, and a quick description of what occurred will only make your race discrimination claim that much stronger!

Best Employee’s Rights Law Firm Blogs on Point:

Disclaimer:

The employment discrimination and wrongful termination content provided on this blog serves for general informational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice regarding your employment rights. No attorney-client relationship is established by accessing or reading the employment law information presented on this blog. While we strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information, we make no representations or warranties regarding its completeness, accuracy, or reliability. Any reliance on the information provided is at your own risk. Additionally, the views expressed in individual blog posts are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the law firm or its attorneys. For personalized legal advice, consult with a qualified attorney familiar with the specific facts of your case. Call Spitz for a free consultation.