Dejesus v. Washington Post Company
134 F. Supp. 3d 183
D.D.C.2015Background
- DeJesus, 63-year-old African American, worked in advertising sales at the Washington Post since 1993.
- He was accused of insubordination after delivering a RAM study to the wrong client without prior consultation.
- Supervisor Wainwright criticized his professionalism and communication, affecting performance reviews.
- Termination memo cited willful neglect of duty and insubordination for not following instructions on RAM study delivery.
- The grievance was arbitrated; arbitrator found no just cause and Post reinstated DeJesus.
- DeJesus filed suit alleging race discrimination under Title VII and §1981 and age discrimination under the ADEA; Post moved for summary judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did DeJesus establish Title VII/§1981 discrimination? | DeJesus argues pretext shows discriminatory motive. | Post asserts non-discriminatory, supervisory decision based on insubordination. | No triable issue; non-discriminatory reason credible. |
| Did DeJesus establish ADEA discrimination? | Age bias evidenced by supervisor's conduct. | Same as Title VII, based on insubordination. | No triable issue; reasons not pretextual. |
| Was the termination justified or pretextual evidence shown? | Arbitration favoring DeJesus indicates pretext. | Arbitration is not controlling and memo shows honest belief in non-discriminatory reasons. | No pretext; court declines to reweigh business decisions. |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973) (establishes burden-shifting framework for discrimination)
- Brady v. Office of the Sergeant at Arms, 520 F.3d 490 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (limits when to assess pretext beyond prima facie case)
- Holcomb v. Powell, 433 F.3d 889 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (evidence of discrimination can be circumstantial and varied)
- Fischbach v. District of Columbia Dept. of Corrections, 86 F.3d 1180 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (employer’s honest belief in reasons defeats pretext claim)
- Lathram v. Snow, 336 F.3d 1085 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (summary-judgment standard in discrimination cases)
- Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co., 415 U.S. 36 (1974) (arbitration decision not controlling on discrimination issues)
- Barbour v. Browner, 181 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 1999) (Title VII not a super-personnel department to reexamine business decisions)