Title VII Workplace Discrimination

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees from discrimination in the workplace because of race, color, sex (including pregnancy), national origin and religion.  Note that Title VII only prohibits discrimination in the workplace on the basis of the aforementioned protected categories.  Therefore, if you are being singled out or otherwise discriminated against because of a personal issue that has nothing to due with your race, color, sex, national origin or religion, Title VII will afford you no relief.  Neither federal law nor North Carolina law grant a cause of action for discrimination based on personal bias alone.

So, what exactly constitutes “discrimination” under Title VII?  Title VII makes it unlawful for an employer to do the following:

• Refuse to hire an individual because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin;

• Discharge an individual because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin;

• Discriminate against an individual with respect to her compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin;

• Limit, segregate or classify an employee or applicant for employment in any way which would deprive such individual of employment opportunities or adversely affect his status as an employee because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin;

• Discriminate against an individual because of her race, color, religion, sex or national origin in admission to or, employment in, any program established to provide apprenticeship or training;

• Retaliate against any employee, applicant or member of a union because he opposed employment practices made unlawful by Title VII or, because he made a charge, testified, assisted or participated in a Title VII investigation, proceeding or hearing;

• Print or publish a notice or advertisement relating to employment indicating a preference, limitation, specification or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin.

If you feel that you have been discriminated against in violation of Title VII, the first thing you should do is file a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.  You must file a charge of discrimination within 180 days of the last discriminatory act.  If you fail to file your charge in time, you may lose valuable rights.  Additionally, you should contact an attorney as soon as possible to discuss further options and steps you should take to build the best possible case and, preserve your rights.

____________________

LaTosha R. Barnes is the owner of The Law Office of L. R. Barnes, PLLC in Durham, North Carolina and, specializes in employment discrimination cases.  The Law Office of L. R. Barnes serves clients in Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill and surrounding cities in the Triangle area.  For more information about North Carolina employment law and The Law Office of L. R. Barnes, please visit the office website.

An Unfair Discharge Is Not A Wrongful Discharge

“My boss accused me of stealing.  But, I didn’t steal anything. He terminated me without any proof and, I feel that I was wrongfully discharged.”

“I was terminated from my job yesterday and, my supervisor gave no reason why I was being fired.  That’s a wrongful discharge, isn’t it?”

“All of my performance reviews were positive.  I never received any warnings.  I was a stellar employee.  But, I was fired.  I want to know what my legal options are.”

“My boss fired me and, I think it was because she didn’t like me.  She can’t do that, can she?  Isn’t that a wrongful discharge?”

I get at least one call a day along these lines.  The caller was discharged because the employer had a personal vendetta against her.  The caller was accused of wrongdoing and, discharged without any satisfactory proof.  The caller was terminated and not given sufficient justification for the termination.  All of these scenarios have one thing in common.  They do not equate to a wrongful discharge under North Carolina law.

North Carolina is an at-will state.  “At-will” means that your employer can discharge you at any time and, for any reason that is not in violation of state or federal law.  It does not matter if the reason is unfair.  It does not matter if the employer has no objective basis for the discharge.  It does not matter if the employer has no reason at all for terminating you.  North Carolina law does not protect employees from a discharge due to reasons that are unfair, unfounded, or even nonexistent.

The term “wrongful discharge” has a very distinct meaning.  If your discharge is in fact wrongful, it would fall within an exception to the rule of at-will employment and you may have a cause of action.  A wrongful discharge occurs if the discharge is in violation of North Carolina public policy.  A discharge violates North Carolina public policy in two situations.  The first situation is if you were terminated because you refused to engage in an illegal act as requested by your employer.  The second situation is if you were terminated because you engaged in a legally protected activity including, but not limited to, filing a complaint, applying for Worker’s Compensation or testifying in court.  Notice how limited the definition of wrongful discharge is.  It is not nearly as broad as most people believe it to be.

With that said, if you were recently discharged and, you want to know what your legal options are, contact me to schedule a consultation.

_______________________

LaTosha R. Barnes is the owner of The Law Office of L. R. Barnes, PLLC in Durham, North Carolina and, specializes in wrongful discharge cases.  The Law Office of L. R. Barnes serves clients in Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill and surrounding cities in the Triangle area.  For more information about North Carolina employment law and The Law Office of L. R. Barnes, please visit the office website.

Sexual Harassment in the Workplace

Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Therefore, if you are a victim of workplace sexual harassment, you may be entitled to legal compensation.  But, before you head to the courthouse, there are several steps you should take to preserve your rights and, build the best case possible.

• Let the harasser know that the sexual conduct is unwelcome.  Sexual conduct in the workplace does not constitute harassment unless it is unwelcome.  Directly inform the harasser that his or her conduct is unwelcome, and that you want it stop immediately.  If at all possible, do this in writing and keep a copy.
• Keep a detailed timeline of events.  Write down every instance of harassment, complete with date, time and a detailed description.  A detailed record will be invaluable if legal action becomes necessary.  It should go without saying but, do not store this record at the workplace.
• Follow your employer’s grievance procedure for reporting sexual harassment.  One of the number one defenses employers use in sexual harassment cases is that the victim failed to follow the proper procedure for reporting the harassment.  Therefore, if there is a sexual harassment grievance procedure in place, follow it.  If there is no formal procedure, do not keep silent.    Bring your complaint to human resources or, follow the proper chain of command.  Make your complaints in writing and keep copies for your records.
• Allow your employer a reasonable opportunity to address the harassment.  Being a victim of workplace sexual harassment does not automatically grant you the right to sue.  You must give your employer a reasonable opportunity to address and rectify the situation.
• File a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.  If you made a complaint to your employer but no appropriate action was taken, contact the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and file a charge of discrimination.   In most cases, a charge of discrimination must be filed within 180 days of the last discriminatory act.  Therefore, do not delay in filing a charge.  If you do, you may lose your right to file suit.
• Contact an attorney.  After filing your charge of discrimination, contact an attorney who specializes in employment law.  Note, however, that you cannot file suit pursuant to Title VII until the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission concludes its investigation and issues you a Notice of Right to Sue.  Nevertheless, you should not hesitate in contacting an attorney, as there may be other claims available to you that you are unaware of.

Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Addresses The Scope of FLSA’s Anti-Retaliation Provision

On March 22, 2011, The United States Supreme Court held that oral complaints are covered under the anti-retaliation provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), if they provide the employer with fair notice under an objective standard.

Petitioner Kevin Kasten worked at Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corporation’s manufacturing facility in Portage, Wisconsin. Employees at the Portage plant punched a Kronos timeclock at the beginning and end of each shift, and when taking lunch. The timeclock Kasten used was positioned inside the area where he and other employees changed in and out of protective gear on a daily basis, which Kasten alleged resulted in employees not being paid for donning and doffing time. Kasten alleged that he made multiple complaints about the timeclocks to Saint-Gobain’s management team, beginning with his immediate supervisor and working up to the Operations Manager and Human Resources Manager. In those complaints, Kasten alleged that he specifically stated that he believed the location of the timeclocks was illegal and that he was thinking about filing a lawsuit to challenge the practice. Kasten never complained in writing, contacted the Department of Labor, or instituted a lawsuit while he was employed. All of his alleged complaints were made in face-to-face meetings with his supervisors.

Kasten brought suit against Saint-Gobain, alleging that it retaliated against him after he complained by suspending and then firing him. Saint-Gobain denied that the firing was retaliatory, claiming instead that it fired Kasten for repeated timekeeping infractions that predated his complaints. The District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin granted Saint-Gobain’s motion for summary judgment, holding that as a matter of law, the FLSA’s anti-retaliation provision, 29 U.S.C. § 215(a)(3), does not protect an employee who makes an oral complaint about FLSA violations to his/her employer.  The Seventh Circuit agreed with the district court that only retaliation in response to a written complaint, which could be filed with the employer, is unlawful under Section 215(a)(3).   The United States Supreme Court reversed, holding that an oral complaint of a violation of the FLSA is protected conduct under the anti-retaliation provision, 29 U.S.C. § 215(a)(3).

Here is a summary of The Supreme Court’s decision and, a brief analysis of how the holding is expected to effect employees and employers in the future.