Gary Smith v. United Parcel Service
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12770
| 8th Cir. | 2016Background
- Gary Smith, an African-American full-time UPS supervisor, was hired in 2010 and promoted to Night Sort supervisor; he had multiple documented interpersonal conflicts with coworkers and supervisors between 2011–2012.
- Incidents included loud confrontations, profanity directed at coworkers/supervisors, complaints about coworkers' treatment, and a formal internal survey criticizing management communication.
- On August 25, 2012, Smith reported missing keys after leaving his office on a task; he accused supervisor Trevor West of taking them, used profane and potentially threatening language, and the police were contacted.
- UPS placed Smith on administrative leave, investigated, and Human Resources (Stan Roux) and Division Manager Tony Taylor met with Smith; UPS concluded Smith had a pattern of misconduct, would not acknowledge or commit to change, and terminated him effective September 14, 2012.
- Smith filed an EEOC claim and then suit alleging race discrimination; the district court granted summary judgment for UPS, finding Smith failed to show UPS’s stated reasons were pretextual. The Eighth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether UPS terminated Smith for race rather than legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons | Smith contends the evidence points to racial motivation and not misconduct | UPS contends it fired Smith for a history of conflicts, use of profanity, alleged threat, and refusal to acknowledge or change behavior | Court held Smith failed to raise a genuine dispute that UPS's stated reason was pretext; judgment for UPS affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Chappell v. Bilco Co., 675 F.3d 1110 (8th Cir. 2012) (standard of review for summary judgment)
- Torgerson v. City of Rochester, 643 F.3d 1031 (8th Cir. 2011) (McDonnell Douglas framework explained)
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (U.S. 1973) (burden-shifting framework for discrimination claims)
- Twymon v. Wells Fargo & Co., 462 F.3d 925 (8th Cir. 2006) (assumption that prima facie case may be satisfied for summary judgment analysis)