In the case of Bostick v. Salvation Army, 2023-Ohio-933, an appellate court held that the employer did not discriminate against the employee based on the employee’s race when the employee was fired for numerous incidents of not getting along with coworkers after receiving warnings for such conduct.
In this case, the employee argued that (1) the employer discriminated against the employee based on the employee’s African-American race because the employee was not considered for a position that a white employee received and the employee was replaced by a person who was not African-American; (2) the employer retaliated against the employee after the employee complained about not receiving the position; and (3) the employer wrongfully discharged the employee when another employee filed retaliatory complaints against the employee in response to the employee’s complaints. In response, the employer argued that (1) the employee had a history of not getting along with coworkers, receiving warnings about the employee’s conduct, being rude, disparaging coworkers, holding only a high school diploma while the white employee held a master’s degree, and being replaced with another African-American person; (2) the employee did not apply for the position and never complained about receiving the position; and (3) the employee filed complaints after the complaints were filed against the employee. The appellate court agreed with employer.
In support of its decision in favor of the employer, the appellate court explained that the employer had a valid reason to terminate the employee due to the employee’s documented history of not getting along with coworkers despite repeated warnings. The appellate court further explained that the evidence did not support any of the employee’s claims, and, in fact, the evidence showed that the employee was wrong about all the employee’s claims.
To read this case, click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.
Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is like the always-changing Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney.