Richards v. Community Choice Credit Union
2:22-cv-13014
E.D. Mich.Sep 30, 2024Background
- Plaintiff Joi Richards, a Black woman, was employed by Community Choice Credit Union (CCCU) from 2019 to 2022, serving as a lending specialist.
- Richards alleged she was subjected to racially offensive comments and conduct during her employment and reported some incidents to management.
- She was placed on a performance improvement plan in August 2022 after taking intermittent FMLA leave, and was later fired for violating confidentiality policies.
- Richards claims her termination was pretextual and retaliatory, following her complaints about racial harassment and her exercise of FMLA rights.
- She sued CCCU for retaliation under the FMLA, and for hostile work environment, retaliation, and discrimination under Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (ELCRA).
- CCCU moved for summary judgment on all claims; the court grants in part and denies in part.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| FMLA Retaliation | Richards was terminated in retaliation for exercising FMLA rights; her firing followed her protected leave and complaints. | CCCU argues termination was solely for violations of confidentiality policies, not FMLA leave. | Denied summary judgment; factual dispute on pretext. |
| Hostile Work Environment (ELCRA) | Subjected to repeated, race-based workplace harassment; CCCU failed to adequately address complaints. | CCCU took corrective action where it could and acted on reports; not sufficiently severe or pervading. | Denied summary judgment; jury could find a hostile environment and insufficient response. |
| Retaliation (ELCRA) | Suffered adverse actions (PIP and termination) shortly after protected complaints about racial harassment. | No protected activity or causal link; actions were non-retaliatory and based on performance/policy violations. | Denied summary judgment; evidence of causal connection and possible pretext. |
| Discrimination (ELCRA) | Treated less favorably than similarly situated non-Black employees regarding policy violations. | Other violations by non-Black employees were less serious; no similarly situated comparator. | Granted summary judgment; insufficient evidence of disparate treatment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Donald v. Sybra, Inc., 667 F.3d 757 (6th Cir. 2012) (sets forth FMLA retaliation prima facie and burden-shifting framework)
- Phillips v. UAW Int’l, 854 F.3d 323 (6th Cir. 2017) (articulates hostile work environment standard under Title VII and ELCRA)
- Ondricko v. MGM Grand Detroit, LLC, 689 F.3d 642 (6th Cir. 2012) (outlines disparate treatment/discrimination analysis under ELCRA)
- Jackson v. Genesee Cnty. Rd. Comm’n, 999 F.3d 333 (6th Cir. 2021) (discusses ELCRA retaliation prima facie and pretext standards)