DECISION-MAKER'S LIE LEADS TO LOSS IN EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT

The last chance before trial: For an employer facing a discrimination lawsuit, summary judgment is often the final opportunity to have the case dismissed before trial. A decision by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals shows how an employer’s dishonesty about the reason for an adverse employment action can undermine its defense and allow a case to proceed to trial.

The Case: In Colbert v. Tapella, a 30-year-old African American woman who worked for the Government Printing Office sued after being passed over for two promotions that went to white men. The hiring officials did not interview candidates and instead relied on written applications, qualifications, questionnaire responses, and any personal knowledge of performance. During the initial EEO investigation, one decision-maker said the plaintiff “wandered,” but he later admitted in deposition that this statement was not true. For related developments, see Recent Employment Law Cases and Hiring Practices.

The Ruling: The D.C. Circuit reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment for the employer, finding error in requiring the plaintiff to prove both that the employer’s stated reason was pretext and that discriminatory bias was the actual reason. The court explained that fabricating an explanation can allow a jury to infer discriminatory intent. Here, the employer’s asserted non‑discriminatory reasons were undermined by the decision‑maker’s false statement about the plaintiff, a lack of factual support showing the plaintiff was less qualified, and insufficient independent evidence that no discrimination occurred.

Lesson Learned: Employers should base adverse employment actions on legitimate, documented, non‑discriminatory reasons and keep those reasons consistent. Changing or inventing explanations creates credibility problems and can be perceived by a jury as evidence of improper motive. This pattern has appeared in other employment disputes as well, for example in coverage of In-N-Out Burger and Employment Discrimination Cases. If you need assistance reviewing policies or responses to internal complaints, talk to an agent.

Article courtesy of Worklaw® Network firm Shawe Rosenthal.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can one false statement by a manager defeat summary judgment?

Yes, a fabricated or inconsistent explanation by a decision-maker can undermine the employer’s credibility and may allow a case to proceed to trial.

What should employers document when making promotion decisions?

Employers should document objective qualifications, the selection criteria used, and any comparisons among candidates to support non‑discriminatory reasons for a decision.

Does an employee always win if an employer’s reason is false?

No, false explanations do not automatically prove discrimination, but they can be strong evidence that supports a plaintiff’s claim when combined with other facts.

When should an employer seek outside help?

Employers should consult HR, legal counsel, or an insurance representative when handling complex claims or when an internal investigation raises credibility concerns.

Need insurance for You, Your Family or Your Business?
We can match you to a qualified, local insurance expert!
Further Reading
Overview Employers should take care when making and explaining layoff decisions, especially when older workers are involved. A recent appellate decision revived an age-discrimination claim after a supervisor made comments about bringing in “younger...
By: Michael A. Warner and Patrick M. DePoy This week, a federal district court ruled that the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) made sufficient factual allegations of intentional discrimination against a local farming company to su...
Overview Employment decisions at high-volume retail and food-service employers sometimes trigger disparate impact or discrimination claims when hiring statistics differ from the available applicant pool. Cases like the one involving In‑N‑Out Burger...
Overview The construction workforce has evolved from physically intensive crews to work that relies more on mechanization, planning, and technical skills. As site work becomes less about brute strength and more about knowledge and safe equipment use...
Overview A federal appeals court recently allowed an age-discrimination claim to proceed after a supervisor’s comments suggested a preference for hiring and keeping younger workers. The decision highlights how remarks about "bringing in the next gen...