629 F. App'x 131
2d Cir.2015Background
- Hartley C. White, a Black Jewish man from Jamaica, worked for Andy Frain Services, Inc. from 2008–2012 and proceeded pro se on appeal.
- White alleged discrimination (race and religion), failure to give a raise, unequal terms/conditions, retaliation for assisting a co-worker, and a hostile work environment based on supervisor remarks.
- District court granted summary judgment to Andy Frain; this appeal reviews that disposition de novo.
- Many complained-of acts were minor workplace inconveniences (late pay, denied vacation requests, occasional forced overtime); White sought a pay increase for all tennis-center employees but no one received one.
- White testified he never told his employer that his Jewish faith precluded working on Passover, only that he wanted vacation to ‘coincide closely’ with Passover.
- The district court found no causal link between off-color remarks and any adverse employment action and concluded White failed to establish discrimination, reasonable accommodation, or retaliation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether White suffered adverse employment actions supporting discrimination claims | White says denial of a raise, late pay, denied vacation, forced overtime and unequal terms were adverse actions | Employer says incidents were minor inconveniences and no discrete adverse actions were taken against White | Held: Most events were not materially adverse; no adverse employment action shown for raise or other complaints |
| Whether remarks by supervisor establish discriminatory motive | White contends off-color comments about being Black and Jewish show discrimination | Employer contends remarks were stray and unconnected to employment decisions | Held: Remarks were stray; no other indicia of discrimination; no causal connection established |
| Whether employer failed to reasonably accommodate White’s religious observance (Passover) | White contends denial of vacation request violated Title VII/NYSHRL/NYCHRL accommodation duties | Employer notes White did not inform it that he could not work on Passover and did not show he was disciplined for not working | Held: No prima facie accommodation claim — White never gave notice of a conflict and no discipline shown |
| Whether employer retaliated against White for assisting coworker | White says he assisted a coworker and then suffered adverse action | Employer shows it raised performance concerns with client but took no further adverse steps once client was satisfied | Held: Evidence at most shows employer raised concerns; no materially adverse action or causal link to support retaliation claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Wolpoff & Abramson, L.L.P., 321 F.3d 292 (2d Cir. 2003) (standard of de novo review for summary judgment)
- Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (1986) (summary judgment when record could not lead a rational trier of fact to find for nonmoving party)
- Terry v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 128 (2d Cir. 2003) (elements of prima facie employment discrimination)
- Mihalik v. Credit Agricole Cheuvreux N. Am., Inc., 715 F.3d 102 (2d Cir. 2013) (NYCHRL requires independent, broader analysis but still prohibits discrimination because of a protected characteristic)
- Danzer v. Norden Sys., Inc., 151 F.3d 50 (2d Cir. 1998) (stray remarks alone insufficient without other indicia of discrimination)
- Davis v. N.Y.C. Dep’t of Educ., 804 F.3d 231 (2d Cir. 2015) (discretionary employer conduct can sometimes be an adverse action)
- Philbrook v. Ansonia Bd. of Educ., 757 F.2d 476 (2d Cir. 1985) (elements for religious accommodation claim)
- Lore v. City of Syracuse, 670 F.3d 127 (2d Cir. 2012) (elements of prima facie retaliation claim)
- Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. v. White, 548 U.S. 53 (2006) (retaliation adverse-action standard: action reasonably likely to deter a worker)