Diego Gaines v. K-Five Construction Corporatio
742 F.3d 256
7th Cir.2014Background
- Gaines, a seasonal truck driver for K-Five Construction, was fired on May 4, 2010 after safety concerns and alleged insubordination, including a misreported statement about a mechanic; he alleged national-origin discrimination and safety-related retaliation, plus an unpaid overtime claim under FLSA.
- Gaines complained about safety of trucks 4279 and 4289; he was reassigned after initially flagging 4279 as unsafe, and later drove 4289 despite concerns noted by him and others.
- Gaines documented truck 4289 issues (steering problems, door, seat, tarp); a near miss occurred with 4289, prompting continued safety concerns and test drives by Lukritz.
- Johnston testified that the steering was off-center, with explanations about possible causes; Gaines later recorded an incorrect “drag-link” statement in his Friday DDR, which led to warnings.
- K-Five issued four warning slips (falsifying a DDR and three acts of insubordination) and a discharge slip, culminating in Gaines’s termination on May 4, 2010.
- The district court granted summary judgment on all counts; on appeal, the Seventh Circuit remanded with respect to STAA and Illinois common law retaliation while affirming dismissal of Title VII and FLSA claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Title VII discrimination/retaliation requiring a comparator | Gaines argues indirect evidence shows discrimination/retaliation; direct method waived | K-Five argues no valid comparator; direct method waived | Title VII claims mostly waived; indirect method lacks a suitable comparator; claims fail on summary judgment |
| STAA retaliation: protected activity and contributing factor | Gaines engaged in protected acts (refusal to drive unsafe trucks; filing DDR) contributing to termination | Employer argues no protected activity or not causally linked | Genuine issues of material fact on multiple STAA activities; remand warranted for STAA analysis |
| Illinois common law retaliation: public-policy violation | Termination for safety-related complaints violates public policy | No clear public-policy violation shown | Not entitled to summary judgment; issues for trial on public-policy retaliation |
| FLSA claim for unpaid overtime | Gaines worked unauthorized 15-minute pre-trip periods; employer knew or should know | Employer did not know of unauthorized overtime; no pay obligation | Summary judgment affirmed for K-Five; no genuine factual dispute about employer knowledge |
Key Cases Cited
- Formella v. U.S. Dep’t of Labor, 628 F.3d 381 (7th Cir. 2010) (basis for prima facie STAA case; shifting burden to employer)
- Roadway Express, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Labor, 495 F.3d 477 (7th Cir. 2007) (protects safety-related complaints under STAA when informing on violations)
- Coleman v. Donahoe, 667 F.3d 835 (7th Cir. 2012) (indirect method requires a suitable comparator; direct method waived)
- Koch Foods, Inc. v. Sec’y, U.S. Dep’t of Labor, 712 F.3d 476 (11th Cir. 2013) (STAA protected complaint when based on reasonable belief of safety violation)
- Bettner v. Admin. Review Bd., 539 F.3d 613 (7th Cir. 2008) (STAA policy to encourage reporting safety violations)