In any workplace, it’s frustrating when you feel like you’re being treated unfairly. Maybe you didn’t get the promotion you were expecting, or you were disciplined more harshly than your coworkers. But when you’re trying to prove race/color discrimination, it’s critical to show that employees outside of your race or color were treated more favorably. However, that’s not all it takes to win a case. In Freeman v. Eaton Corp., No. 23-2981, 2024 WL 4200580 (7th Cir. Sept. 16, 2024), the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reviewed whether an African American employee had enough evidence to move forward with his claim that Eaton Corporation treated him worse than his white coworkers based on race.
De’Carlos Freeman, a Black forger at Eaton Corporation, faced multiple challenges at work. Freeman alleged that he was denied promotions, wrongfully suspended for being argumentative, and subjected to other negative treatment, while white coworkers were treated better under similar circumstances. The District Court dismissed Freeman’s race discrimination claims, finding that he hadn’t tied the negative actions to his race. But on appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed the dismissal in part, holding that Freeman’s employment discrimination allegations were enough to allow his race claims to proceed.
Let’s break down how the case played out and what lessons employees can take from it.
The Race Discrimination Claim: What Went Wrong And What Went Right?
Freeman alleged that he was denied a promotion and that his promotion was delayed while his white coworkers advanced. He claimed that one supervisor held up his “skill block” necessary for promotion by saying Freeman “did not know how to work the computer,” despite the fact that White employees didn’t use computers either. On top of that, Freeman was suspended for being argumentative after a disagreement with his supervisor, but his White coworkers who were argumentative weren’t disciplined in the same way.
While the District Court initially dismissed Freeman’s claims, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit found that he had alleged enough facts to survive the motion to dismiss. The Seventh Circuit explained that Freeman’s allegations, if true, suggested that he suffered an adverse action (the suspension and delayed promotion) and that these actions were motivated by his race, particularly because he alleged that white coworkers who engaged in similar conduct were not punished. As the Seventh Circuit pointed out, “A suspension can constitute an adverse action” and, when combined with the allegations of differential treatment, this can create an inference of race discrimination. Freeman at 3.
But it’s important to note that the Seventh Circuit didn’t say Freeman had proven discrimination—only that his case could proceed to the next stage where he could attempt to prove it. The court emphasized that “a plaintiff does not need to plead a prima facie case of employment discrimination” to survive a motion to dismiss. All Freeman needed to do at this early stage was “assert that he was treated worse because of [his] protected characteristics.” Freeman at 3. The case will now move forward, giving Freeman the opportunity to provide more evidence of race discrimination.
Best Race Discrimination Lawyer Blogs on Point:
- Discriminatory Failure To Promote Claim Relies On Being A Markedly Superior Candidate
- Can A Higher Degree Prove Failure To Promote?
- How Do You Prove Failure To Promote Under Title VII?
- When Does Being Passed Up For A Promotion Equal Discrimination?
- Can I Sue Because My Job Treats Me Worse Because Of My Race?
The Retaliation Claim: What If The Decision Maker Doesn’t Know About The Protected Activity?
In addition to his race discrimination claims, Freeman also alleged that he was suspended in retaliation for filing a complaint with the South Bend Human Rights Commission. Freeman filed his complaint several months before the suspension, but he didn’t provide evidence that the person who suspended him knew about his complaint or that the timing of the suspension was unusually close to the complaint. For this reason, both the District Court and the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit dismissed the retaliation claim.
Best Wrongful Termination Law Firm Blogs on Point:
- Employment Retaliation Cannot Be Based On Protected Conduct The Employer Never Knew About
- Navigating Retaliation Claims Under the Retaliatory Employment Discrimination Act in North Carolina
- Is It Illegal For My Job To Retaliate Against Me For Reporting Discrimination And Harassment?
The Retaliation Claim: What Does Temporal Proximity Mean And Why Does It Matter?
It’s important to note that timing is crucial in retaliation claims. When there’s a short period between the protected activity (like filing a discrimination complaint) and the adverse action (like being fired or suspended), courts sometimes infer causation based on that timing alone. This is called “temporal proximity.” But the timing has to be extremely close—usually within days or weeks. In Freeman’s case, the Seventh Circuit found that the suspension occurred too long after the complaint, stating that Freeman’s allegation “does not plausibly connect the charge to the suspension months later.” Freeman at 3.
Employees need to understand that in retaliation claims, it’s not just about proving that you filed a complaint and later faced discipline. You also have to show that the two events are linked—either through close timing or through evidence that the person who disciplined you knew about the complaint and acted because of it. Without that connection, a retaliation claim can fall apart.
Best Workplace Retaliation Lawyer Blogs on Point:
- How Do You Prove Causation In A Retaliation Claim?
- What Are Examples Of Unlawful Retaliation At Work?
- How Do I Prove A Claim For Post-Employment Retaliation?
Lessons For Employees
The Freeman case is a reminder that race discrimination claims hinge on showing that workers outside your protected class—whether they’re white, male, younger, or another group—were treated more favorably. Freeman’s case was allowed to proceed because he alleged that his white coworkers weren’t suspended or held back from promotions the way he was. But while his case survived the motion to dismiss, the burden will now be on him to provide more evidence that race played a role in the adverse actions he suffered.
The case also highlights how crucial timing is in retaliation claims. Temporal proximity between filing a complaint and being disciplined can help prove causation, but in Freeman’s case, the timing wasn’t close enough, and there was no other evidence linking the complaint to the suspension.
If you believe you’ve been discriminated against or retaliated against at work, it’s essential to document everything—including how coworkers outside your protected class were treated—and to speak with an experienced employment attorney who can guide you through the process.
Disclaimer
The race discrimination and retaliation information provided in this employment law blog is for general guidance and should not be construed as legal advice. Employment discrimination and retaliation cases, whether based on race, gender, disability, or another protected class, are complex and fact specific. Every case is different, and your circumstances may require tailored legal advice. If you believe you’ve been subjected to race discrimination, retaliation, or wrongful termination based on a protected characteristic, contact Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm for a free consultation. Our attorneys have extensive experience handling cases under Title VII and similar employment laws. No guarantees or promises about the outcome of your case are being made, and every case must be evaluated on its own facts.