Under Ledbetter, Past Discrimination in Training Opportunities Cannot Be Used To Support Current Claim of Non-Discriminatory Act
JACKSON v. CITY OF CHICAGO (January 13, 2009)
George Jackson was a carpenter in the Public Works Department in the City of Chicago from 1987 until 2003, when he was promoted to foreman. In 2004, the City announced the availability of two jobs as general foreman of general trades – one each in the Departments of Transportation and General Services. Jackson applied for both jobs. He was offered neither. The City promoted Michael Blake to the Department of Transportation job. Blake had more experience as a carpenter, had more experience estimating the material and manpower needs of a project, and significantly outscored Jackson on a written test of communication skills. The City promoted Kevin O’Gorman to the Department of General Services job. O’Gorman received the highest combined score for the interview and work sample. Jackson did not even submit a work sample. Jackson brought an action against the City. He alleged race and age discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. The court granted summary judgment to the City. Jackson appeals the Title VII race discrimination judgment.
In their opinion, Judges Kanne, Evans and Sykes affirmed. The Court noted that Jackson was proceeding under the indirect method of proof. The first requirement of that indirect method is to establish a prima facie case of discrimination. The Court recited the elements of the prima facie case: a) he is a member of a protected class, b) he is qualified for the position, c) he was rejected, and d) the position was given to a person not in the protected class who was less or similarly qualified. Thus, if a job is given to a better qualified individual, the plaintiff’s case must fail. The Court concluded that both promotions were awarded to better qualified individuals. Jackson argued that his qualifications suffered in comparison to the others because the City had discriminated against him in the past by denying him training opportunities. The Court rejected Jackson’s approach. First, Jackson never filed an EEOC charge involving training opportunity discrimination, a prerequisite to a Title VII action. Second, to the extent Jackson argued that the discrimination in training opportunities was not an independent claim but merely support for his primary claim, the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear disposes of that theory. The 2004 acts were not discriminatory. Under Ledbetter, a new violation does not occur at the time of later non-discriminatory acts, even if they have adverse effects resulting from past discrimination.
Michael Rigney practices in the law offices of GVC Ltd. in Chicago. In this blog, he reports on select