Eighth Circuit Says Racist Comment Not Justification for Terminating Striking Worker

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Under most employers’ anti-discrimination and harassment policies, an employee who makes overt racist comments toward a co-worker would likely face termination. In addition to the moral and ethical purposes behind such policies, employers may fear that failure to take strong remedial action in light of such comments could subject them to potential legal action from the target of the racist comments. However, according to a new decision from the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, in certain situations racist comments alone may not be enough to overcome employees’ rights under federal labor law.

In Cooper Tire & Rubber Co. v. NLRB, an employee on strike made a number of racist comments while on the picket line directed at African-American replacement workers. Other employees overheard the employee asking whether he smelled fried chicken and watermelon when a van carrying the replacement workers approached the picket line. After the employer learned of these comments, it terminated the employee for violation of its harassment policy. The employee filed a grievance and eventually an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

The NLRB concluded that Section 7 of the NLRA guarantees striking employees the right to engage in confrontational behavior, and that impulsive acts alone are not sufficient to overcome these rights in the absence of evidence of direct coercion or intimidation. In a 2-1 decision, the Eighth Circuit agreed, noting that unpleasant and uncalled for conduct is nevertheless protected in some circumstances. In this case, the racist comments were a one-time event and were not directed at or even overheard by the replacement workers. As such, the conduct did not create a racially hostile work environment under Title VII.

The court affirmed an order reinstating the terminated employee with back pay. The dissenting judge said that employers are not required to tolerate racist behavior by employees, and that the decision requires the employer to violate federal anti-discrimination laws.

This case arose out of unusual circumstances, but it demonstrates how far the NLRB and some courts will go to prevent employers from terminating employees involved in labor activities. Other recent cases have held that vague threats against supervisors and other conduct that would otherwise result in termination are protected in the context of a labor dispute.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.