"Monkeys!"

A federal district court in Mississippi has denied summary judgment on a hostile environment claim to an employer who is accused of multiple instances of racially derogatory remarks (calling black employees "monkeys"). Once would have been OK, but not several times.

Age based hostile environment claim in Fifth Circuit

In Dediol v. Best Chevrolet, the Fifth Circuit has for the first time held a hostile environment claim under the ADEA is actionable. The Court reversed summary judgment for the employer both on the ADEA hostile environment claim as well as on a religious discrimination hostile environment claim.

Hostile environment claim fails

Calling an African-American employee "boy" even on multiple occasions, is not sufficient evidence to withstand summary judgment according to the Eleventh Circuit. Hat tip to the Workplace Prof Blog. More after the jump
Alexander v. Opelika Pub. Schs., No. 08-11014 (11th Cir. 11/10/09) is an unpublished opinion which upholds summary judgment against an employee who claims

that he was called “boy” constantly, but could only recall eight specific instances over the course of two years where he was called “boy.”  Second, in examining the severity of the alleged conduct, the most severe comment was made by his supervisor about how to tie a noose around a person’s neck.  This comment, however, was not directed toward Alexander, and Alexander testified that he did not know whether this comment referred to black people.  Further, none of the alleged racial comments contained threats of physical violence, and he did not demonstrate that the comments interfered with his job performance.

Based upon this showing, the Court concluded there was not sufficient evidence presented for a reasonable person to conclude that the harassment was frequent or severe. This case underscores the hesitancy federal courts have to find intentional discrimination when confronted with workplace insensitivity. It seems the unspoken rule is, that absent some objective showing actual job performance is adversely affected by the alleged harassing event, summary judgment is appropriate. A black worker being called "boy" by his supervisor and co-workers on 8 specific occasions, and additionally on occasions which the employee had no specific memory is not pervasive harassment.