Public and Private School Employment Discrimination Lawsuits

Employment decisions in public and private schools should be based on qualifications, performance, merit, and seniority rather than race, national origin, gender, religion, age, or disability. One frequently asked question under these circumstances is, “Can I sue my employer for discrimination?” Simply put, teachers and other school personnel can pursue an employment discrimination lawsuit, for example, if they are wrongfully dismissed or demoted, prevented from initially obtaining a job, or not appropriately accommodated for a disability or medical condition. Most employment discrimination violates state or federal law, and legal protections are found in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Additionally, two primary federal statutes prohibit disability discrimination in employment: the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990.

Statutes are extensive and complex, vary considerably, and can be confusing. As such, there is no simple solution to various public and private school employment discrimination lawsuits. However, a careful review of the progression of events associated with a complaint often will bring litigation to a reasonable conclusion. In such cases as a teacher being fired or an applicant being excluded from a job interview, attorneys representing plaintiffs and schools must present a clear timeline of events leading up to a decision. Often, this task is accomplished in retrospect after a lawsuit has been filed, and any lack of documentation can make it difficult for the plaintiff to argue employment discrimination or for a school to defend its decisions.

Reconstructing the file — an employee’s discrete, day-to-day personnel issues or the employment interview and process, for instance — is necessary to determine whether the school, through its administration, acted appropriately, reasonably, and within the professional standard of care. Knowledge of employment law and the nuances that often exist in the school context is helpful to attorneys in representing the best interests of their clients in public and private school employment discrimination lawsuits. Above all, however, a timeline of events and analysis of each significant entry is most important in determining whether a school met the law. As for school employees asking, “Can I sue my employer for discrimination?” It is crucial to understand the various hiring actions of a potentially discriminatory nature. This article will examine multiple examples of school employment discrimination lawsuits and the available legal protections against employment discrimination.

Anatomy of an Employment Discrimination Lawsuit

A recent case in South Carolina illustrates the importance of a timeline. Spartanburg School District Seven reportedly will pay $62,000 to settle a former teacher’s employment discrimination lawsuit. Frances Grady claimed she faced discrimination based on her disability, race, and age. The full details of the case were not disclosed publicly; however, court documents reveal the basics.

Grady, who was employed by the district for more than 30 years, was diagnosed with a condition that weakened her immune system. Grady said the school made accommodations for her, allowing her to teach smaller groups of students as an “interventionist.” In my opinion, such an accommodation would be appropriate and reasonable and would have met the needs of the employee and the school at that time. Of course, a district’s needs may change over time, possibly necessitating staff restructuring. In other words, Grady’s accommodation might be viable for one year but not the next. The following year, the school reassigned her to teach first grade.
This raises the question: When did the school learn of Grady’s disability? Did it accommodate her by assigning her to teach as an interventionist, or did Grady disclose her disability after the school reassigned her to teach first grade?

In her employment discrimination lawsuit, Grady told school officials that her condition prevented her from teaching first grade. She said the school told her it would no longer use interventionists and forced her to go on leave without pay because, in her belief, it would no longer accommodate her disability. Subsequently, Grady was not offered a teaching contract.

Later, Grady, who is white and in her 50s, learned that a younger, less-experienced African-American male was hired as an interventionist, thus prompting her claims of race and age employment discrimination.

In this lawsuit, if it could have been demonstrated that the school knew of Grady’s disability, accommodated her by assigning her to the interventionist position, then reassigned her to first grade — knowing that her disability would not allow her to be effective in that role — and finally replaced her with someone else, the school would have had difficulty justifying its position.

In its defense, the school denied that Grady had been offered the interventionist position because of her health. It also claimed that it was only after her reassignment to first grade that Grady submitted medical documentation about her diagnosis and requested accommodation. The school acknowledged that Grady was not offered a teaching contract after granting her request for medical leave but denied that its action stemmed from any discriminatory or retaliatory reason.

In similar employment discrimination lawsuit examples, if a school can show that it declined to offer the plaintiff a contract because of a change in its staffing structure—and not because of her disability—then it is likely that the school would have been able to justify its position.

Title VII School Employment Discrimination Protections

Addressing the question, “Can I sue my employer for discrimination?” also requires examining the extent of legal protections for public and private schools and employees.

Title VII prohibits entities with 15 or more employees from discriminating based on race, color, religion, gender, or national origin. The statute covers hiring, promotion, compensation practices, fringe benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment. In lawsuits, employment discrimination can be established by showing that the applicant is a protected class member, applied for and was qualified for the job, and was denied the position. At the same time, the employer continued to seek applicants with the plaintiff’s qualifications.

When a public or private school posts a position for a teacher, lists the qualifications, and interviews several qualified candidates but denies the position to a highly skilled individual who discussed her religious affiliation with interviewers, this individual might believe she was subjected to religious discrimination and sue the school. In this school employment discrimination lawsuit example, the candidate would need to show, at a minimum, that she met the posted requirements for the positions, that other candidates were not as experienced and thus not as qualified, that the school did not offer her the position, and that it continued to interview.

In its defense, the school would need to state a reason for its decision that does not violate Title VII. A reason for not hiring may be objective, such as the requirement that the candidate possess a graduate degree; subjective, such as an assessment of interpersonal skills; or a combination of both in determining which applicant is best qualified. If the school cannot show a nondiscriminatory reason for its action, a decision in favor of the plaintiff’s employment discrimination lawsuit most likely would be granted. Additionally, the school should present a timeline of events from when the position was posted (including a copy of the posting) through the interview, reference check, and finally, a decision to hire another person. If the timeline reveals gaps in documentation and the school cannot account for actions that should have been taken, this will strengthen a decision for the plaintiff.

Given the ease of presenting a non-discriminatory reason, schools should be able to provide a satisfactory response in nearly every instance of an employment discrimination lawsuit. For example, suppose the school hiring the teacher can show that discussions with past employers revealed that fellow staff did not like a candidate and often argued with them unprofessionally. In that case, these are valid considerations in the hiring process. However, how much weight this should have is often argued in litigation. The school should develop a method for documenting interviews with former employers, particularly concerning specific statements provided by an interviewee and the impressions of the person making the call.

Suppose the school argues that nobody who interviewed the candidate knew of her religious affiliation and that it was not included in the application. In that case, it has a good chance of showing that it acted appropriately and reasonably. Within the professional standard of care, and if it meets the requirements of Title VII, it may not be liable for the allegations of employment discrimination lawsuits. On the other hand, if one of the interviewers pointedly asked the candidate about religious holidays she would likely take during the school year, this may be interpreted as obtaining information about the person’s religion that later factored into a hiring decision. When events during the interview might be the subject of disagreement, the jury will address the witness’s credibility.

After the school provides a rebuttal, the plaintiff has the additional burden of proving that the school’s stated reason for not hiring is false and is a pretext for prohibited intentional discrimination. In most public and private school employment discrimination lawsuits, showing a pretextual basis for discrimination is difficult. The plaintiff is likely to be successful only when clearly articulated, verbally or in writing, that the candidate was not hired because of a protected factor. This information may be found in a thorough document review during discovery. Notes made by people who interviewed the candidate might reveal bias through comments such as “too many religious holidays.”
All in all, if you have been wondering, “Can I sue my employer for discrimination?’’ The reality is that protection against discriminatory employment practices is not absolute. Facially discriminatory practices based on religion, gender, or national origin (but not on race or color) may be permitted if they relate directly to a bona fide occupational qualification, such as a requirement that the head of a Catholic school is Catholic.

Disability Employment Discrimination

Another area that often comes up in public and private school employment discrimination lawsuits is disability, which refers to an individual applying for a position or a current employee. Federal disability law protects individuals who can show they are “otherwise qualified” for a job, although reasonable accommodations may sometimes be needed. Suppose a person meets the requirements for a position but uses a wheelchair, for instance. In that case, the school must consider how it can make an accommodation so that the individual can function successfully in the job.

When a person with an identified disability applies for a position at a school, the school must determine whether they are otherwise qualified. To be an otherwise qualified individual with a disability, the applicant must be able to perform the job’s essential functions despite the disability. However, reasonable accommodation may be necessary at times. Consider, for example, an employment discrimination lawsuit involving a school that posts a position for a high school social studies teacher. The announcement attracted the attention of a junior high school social studies teacher who has taught in the district for seven years. When it first hired her, the district assigned the teacher to a classroom on the second floor of a three-story building. Because of her disability, the teacher used a wheelchair and an elevator to get to her classroom. The high school is in an older building with three floors but no elevator. In this situation, the school must first consider the applicant’s qualifications for the position, regardless if she uses a wheelchair. If she is otherwise qualified, the school must consider reasonable accommodations necessary for her to function in the position.

Is it reasonable for the school to construct an elevator to accommodate the teacher if she were to be assigned to a classroom on the third floor? Alternatively, is it reasonable to move the social studies class to the first floor so she can get to the school? Assuming she was otherwise qualified but not offered the position, the teacher would have a claim that she was discriminated against because of her disability. She could argue that moving the class to the first floor would have been a reasonable accommodation.

In defense against such an employment discrimination lawsuit, the school should produce documentation that it considered what accommodations would be necessary for the person to be successful in the position during the interview process and afterward. Suitable documentation would include a checklist of potential accommodations and/or modifications, such as moving a class to the first floor for a teacher who uses a wheelchair or constructing a handicapped-accessible bathroom on the first floor of an older building.

Conclusion

Basing employment decisions strictly on qualifications, performance, merit, and seniority rather than race, national origin, gender, religion, age, or disability is the law. Still, prospective employees or current teachers or staff can interpret employment decisions in various ways, raising questions of equity and possibly attracting employment discrimination lawsuits in public and private schools. Sorting out what is in the school’s best interest while assuring that an individual’s rights are maintained can be confusing. Sometimes, decisions need to be made for the school, but not to the exclusion of the individual’s employment rights. It is not easy to balance the institution’s needs with providing an adequate education for students and the employment rights of its teachers and staff.

Documented timelines are essential for both plaintiff and defendant attorneys. These are necessary for reviewing and analyzing whether a school acted within the law when making employment decisions. Documentation of candidate interviews, reference checks, and issues leading to a decision to reject a candidate for a job is also essential for determining whether a school acted within the professional standard of care.

The critical thing to remember is that treating all potential or current employees the same may not accommodate individual needs and may inadvertently result in discrimination, which can lead to employment discrimination lawsuits. Alternatively, treating each person differently may provide advantages to some over others. There is no simple solution for every case.

Our education expert witness services at School Liability Expert Group include case analysis and review, expert trial and deposition testimony, comprehensive case reports, and consultations for plaintiff and defendant attorneys. Having worked with hundreds of law firms in the U.S. and Canada on various school liability matters, our court-qualified experts are highly experienced in hiring, screening, supervising, and terminating school employees.

We also help schools review their program quality and practices to ensure they comply with all applicable laws and the professional standard of care and minimize the risk of employment discrimination lawsuits. We provide quality recommendations and training on compliant employment practices. Book a call today to discuss your matter with our experts.

Like this article? Feel free to share: