Race Motivated Firing of a White Woman, Court Says

Courthouse News Service ^ | February 10, 2011 | JOE CELENTINO

[epithermal]

CHICAGO (CN) - After a white employee for the city park district reported a possible incident of child abuse involving a black child and his aunt, her employer committed race discrimination by firing her, the 7th Circuit found.

[epithermal]

"In the case at hand, the federal appeals court determined that a racist employee need not exercise "singular influence" over the firing decision for a Title VII claim to be valid. Employers can also be held liable for lesser degrees of influence."

I'm not a lawyer, but doesn't this set a dangerous precedent?

[Dan(9698)]

The lesson is: Don’t fire the token white lady.

[blam]

"The lesson is: Don’t fire the token white lady."

(ahem) Either that or 'act White' when she's around?

[freedumb2003]

>>I’m not a lawyer, but doesn’t this set a dangerous precedent?<<

Interesting question — what do you forsee as such a precedent?

[Republic of Texas]

The worst thing that could happen to liberal black people is to have this firing upheld. Of course, that’s exactly what they’ll cheer for, until it starts happening to them.

[BenLurkin]

CHICAGO: I'm surprised they didn't accuse her of being a white racist and firing her on that basis.

Adams, who is also black, explained the aunt's actions as "a cultural thing," saying "this is the way we discipline children in our culture." Adams told Schandelmeier that she had once tried to hit her daughter with a belt but hit the wall instead, and her daughter still screamed.

A jury said Schandelmeier's firing was racially motivated and awarded the woman $200,000. But an Illinois federal judge reversed...

[driftdiver]

People already get fired for racial discrimination. How is this a dangerous precedent?

[netmilsmom]

I wonder if a welt magically appeared on her daughter’s arm like JJ’s.

“J.J. had a welt on his arm and was crying.”

[Verginius Rufus]

So it sounds like she gets $30,000 four or five years after losing her job. I hope she found something else in the meantime.

[epithermal]

I am wondering what a “lesser degree of influence” would mean legally? From the article:

“”The Supreme Court has not yet resolved the circumstances under which an employer may be held liable based on the discriminatory intent of employees who influence but do not actually make the ultimate employment decision,” Judge Daniel Hamilton wrote for the court’s three-judge panel.”

Imagine you are an employer and lay off a person based on complaints, racial or otherwise, from an employee about another employee. I would say you would have to be very certain of the circumstances before firing anyone or face the liability.

[oh8eleven]

Adams, who is also black, explained the aunt's actions as "a cultural thing," saying "this is the way we discipline children in our culture."
Oh yeah, that black culture thing has been REAL successful.

[Verginius Rufus]

Maybe Eric Holder will appeal this to the Supreme Court (if he has standing to get involved) to avoid setting a precedent that laws against racial discrimination can be applied on behalf of a white person. The Department of Justice believes that only racial minorities are supposed to benefit from such laws.

[RobinOfKingston]

What’s holder had to say about this? Has the fired lady been arrested yet?

[Emperor Palpatine]

That pitiful excuse was tried by Mike Vick, too.

[blau993]

I would not read a lot into this case, and it is certainly no watershed event in the field of discrimination law.

The trial judge had overruled the jury's finding that the firing was discriminatory. That is not unheard of, but it is not usual. That fact gave the Court of Appeals some latitude to delve into the facts itself, which is something appellate courts ordinarily can't do and don't do.

The appellate court then reinstated the jury's verdict but cut the award from $200,000 to $30,000. That's a polite way of saying, "Just because we thought the trial judge was wrong doesn't mean we thought the jury was right."

I don't believe you will see this opinion cited very often in future cases.

[Joe 6-pack]

"Adams, who is also black, explained the aunt's actions as "a cultural thing," saying "this is the way we discipline children in our culture."

Ah, yes...the Michael Vick defense!

[arrdon]

Actually, DOJ believes only ‘black’, as in American Negro, persons can be allowed to benefit from racial descrimination suits. They don’t need any unnecessary competition for the dollars, or the tears. WAAAAAA !!! The ultimate whiner mentality at work.

[Polybius]

Adams, who is also black, explained the aunt's actions as "a cultural thing," saying "this is the way we discipline children in our culture." Adams

I guess I'm old enough to have been "raised black".

[freedumb2003]

>>Imagine you are an employer and lay off a person based on complaints, racial or otherwise, from an employee about another employee. I would say you would have to be very certain of the circumstances before firing anyone or face the liability.<<

Having been an employer, that has been true forever. And there isn’t hard and fast guidance from the courts either. This case doesn’t appear to provide much more guidance, either. It seems to be narrowly framed.

[Dan(9698)]

Has the fired lady been arrested yet?

The story doesn't say.