Carrera v. Commercial Coating Services International, Ltd.
422 F. App'x 334
5th Cir.2011Background
- CCSI is a Conroe, Texas-based company that contracts field technicians to work on pipelines and valves.
- Five former employees (Carrera, Dixon, Ernie Hernandez, Michael Hernandez, Tello) allege race-based harassment and retaliation for complaining.
- District court granted summary judgment to CCSI on both hostile environment and retaliation claims under Title VII and § 1981.
- Hispanic appellants claim harassment by Hicks (black) and Dougherty (white); Dixon alleges harassment by Hicks.
- Ernie Hernandez, unlike the others, is alleged to have been terminated in June 2008 following the alleged harassment and other incidents.
- Court reviews district court’s summary-judgment decision de novo, focusing on whether genuine issues of material fact exist.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Discrimination: whether non-Ernie appellants showed actionable hostile environment | Appellants claim race-based harassment created a hostile environment. | Harassment alleged by Carrera, Dixon, Tello, and Michael is vague and unsubstantiated. | Summary judgment affirmed for all four appellees on discrimination. |
| Discrimination: Ernie Hernandez’s claims survive | Ernie’s incidents show severe harassment; termination may be retaliatory. | Record lacks sufficient basis to find discrimination against Ernie. | Ernie’s discrimination claim survives summary judgment; triable issue remains. |
| Retaliation: generic Appellants’ retaliation claims fail | Appellants’ complaints about harassment caused a reduction in field work. | Proffered reasons (performance issues) justify reduced field assignments; no pretext shown. | Summary judgment upheld for CCSI on Carrera, Dixon, Tello, Michael Hernandez. |
| Ernie Hernandez’s retaliation claim | Termination followed his complaints of harassment; possible pretext. | Termination based on unauthorized break-in; evidence contested. | Genuine issues of material fact on Ernie’s retaliation claim; reversal on this issue. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ramsey v. Henderson, 286 F.3d 264 (5th Cir. 2002) (prima facie case and standard for hostile environment)
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (U.S. Supreme Court 1973) (burden-shifting framework for discrimination)
- Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (U.S. Supreme Court 1993) (severity and pervasiveness standard for hostile environment)
- Turner v. Baylor Richardson Med. Ctr., 476 F.3d 337 (5th Cir. 2007) (totality-of-circumstances test for harassment)
- Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (U.S. Supreme Court 1998) (employer liability for supervisor harassment)
- Byers v. Dallas Morning News, Inc., 209 F.3d 419 (5th Cir. 2000) (protected activity includes opposing unlawful practices)
- Davis v. Dallas Area Rapid Transit, 383 F.3d 309 (5th Cir. 2004) (causal link in retaliation claims)
- McCoy v. City of Shreveport, 492 F.3d 551 (5th Cir. 2007) (pretext evidence burden in retaliation)
- Laxton v. Gap Inc., 333 F.3d 572 (5th Cir. 2003) (pretext and causation standards in Title VII retaliation)
- First Colony Life Ins. Co. v. Sanford, 555 F.3d 177 (5th Cir. 2009) (summary judgment standards for appellate review)