Industry News

Security Guard Alleges Racial Discrimination

Facts: Ronald Harris, a black man, worked as a nightclub security guard from 2004 through 2005, when the club ceased operations. In 2005, Harris filed a complaint against his employer with the EEOC alleging that racial discrimination was the reason he was not offered an assistant manager position. Nine days after Harris filed the complaint, he was suspended from work without pay. Harris alleged that his employer told him he could return to work if he dropped his discrimination claims, but that he refused to do so. In 2007, Harris filed a lawsuit against his employer for the events alleged to have occurred during the course of his employment.

Harris' employer filed a motion for summary judgment and argued that there was no evidence supporting the claims, maintaining the employment decisions were justified by legitimate, non-discriminatory motives. Harris' employer contended that Harris failed to prove that there was an open position that he actually applied for or that he was suspended without pay as retaliation for filing his EEOC complaint.

Decision: In order to establish a case of discrimination in the denial of a promotion, an employee must demonstrate that the employer had an open position for which the employee was qualified and further that the employer rejected the employee under circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination. The evidence submitted by both Harris and his employer suggested that the position Harris allegedly sought was never an open position and that Harris was therefore barred from pursuing his claims for employment discrimination.

However, the district court also reviewed Harris' claim for retaliation which required Harris to prove that after he filed an employment discrimination claim an adverse employment action was taken against him and the two events were related to one another. The court noted that the timing alone of the suspension in relation to the EEOC complaint suggested that the employer may have acted out of retaliation. Because Harris established a sufficient basis for his claim, his employer was required to articulate a non-retaliatory reason for the suspension. The court noted the employer failed to state a clear cause or to support it with sufficient evidence and that a jury could reasonably believe Harris was suspended due to filing his complaint for discrimination. The district court, therefore, granted in part and denied in part the employer's motion for summary judgment.

Implications: Employers should never consider the race, gender or other “protected” attribute of an individual when deciding whether to hire or fire an employee. Maintaining clear records that document job performance is a good practice that can help support an employer's decisions when faced with allegations of discriminatory practices. Source: Security Law Newsletter, published monthly by Strafford Publications, Atlanta, GA. phone: 800-926-7926 ext. 10 or email: custserv@straffordpub.com or go to web site: www.straffordpub.com.

Texas: 800.221.3386 • 713.521.9251 • Fax 800.700.0126 • 713.521.0125 • 3673 Westcenter Dr. • Houston, Texas 77042
California: 800.221.3386 • 661.393.4710 • Fax: 800.700.0126 • 661.393.4771
2809 Unicorn Road, Ste 102 • Bakersfield, CA 93308
Doing business in California under License #OE59720, dba El Dorado Security Services Insurance Agency.