Abril-Rivera v. Johnson
806 F.3d 599
1st Cir.2015Background
- FEMA operates NPSCs to process disaster claims; PR-NPSC was Puerto Rico’s bilingual facility.
- Plaintiffs, PR-NPSC employees, alleged Title VII disparate impact and retaliation due to rotational staffing and closure.
- A 2007 METAR found serious safety deficiencies at PR-NPSC; 2008 fire/life-safety review documented more issues.
- May 2008: FEMA adopted a rotational staffing plan (15–20 employees at a time) during repairs.
- Lease for PR-NPSC expired Sept. 2008; FEMA considered relocation/closure due to costs and declining Spanish-language workload.
- Dec. 2008: DHS/Secretary approved closure; some employees transferred to other NPSCs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether disparate impact exists from rotational staffing and closing | Disparate impact on Puerto Rican employees from PR-NPSC actions. | Actions were job-related and consistent with business necessity; alternatives unavailable. | Disparate impact claims rejected; actions justified by safety and cost considerations. |
| Whether retaliation linked protected activity to adverse actions | Rotation and closure were retaliatory for EEO complaints and pay-related claims. | No causal connection; timing insufficient and actions predated complaints; not retaliatory. | Retaliation claims rejected; insufficient causation shown. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ricci v. DeStefano, 557 U.S. 557 (U.S. 2009) (disparate-impact liability requires business-necessity and consideration of alternatives)
- Texas Department of Housing & Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 2507 (U.S. 2015) (disparate-impact liability must not force artificial barriers; respect governmental priorities)
- Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (U.S. 1971) (disparate-impact framework and avoidance of artificial barriers)
- Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio, 490 U.S. 642 (U.S. 1989) (standards for applying disparate-impact analysis in employment decisions)
- Breeden v. Clark County School Dist., 532 U.S. 268 (U.S. 2001) (temporal proximity evidence in causation inquiries; pretext considerations)
- Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405 (U.S. 1975) (burden-shifting pretext framework in disparate-impact cases)
- S.S. Clerks Union, Local 1066, 48 F.3d 594 (1st Cir. 1995) (pretext and burden-shifting analysis in disparate-impact claims)