Employment & Labor Law
Please select a topic from the drop down list
Total National Origin Discrimination Cases: 11
Plaintiff, a black male of Haitian origin brought suit against his employer under s. 1981 and Title VII alleging that he was discriminated against on the basis of race and claims for discrimination based on national origin under Title VII and the Florida Civil Rights Act. Plaintiff had received several written warnings as well as a transfer to another position, however the plaintiff
Read More
George Akouri had applied for three different promotions and was denied every time; he claimed he was denied because of his national origin. Plaintiff is a United States citizen who was born in Lebanon. He has lived in the US since 1984 and he holds a bachelor
Read More
Plaintiff was born in Haiti and is of Haitian descent. In March 2000, he began his employment with Walgreens. He was a full time student and his hours were limited to after 3:30 p.m. during weekdays. He worked between 20 and 30 hours a week. During his employment, he wore various colored hats because it represented his Haitian culture. His hat never became an issue when Moncrieffe was the manager. In July 2000, Rosario became the manager. He instructed plaintiff to wax the floors and plaintiff objected. In March 2001, plaintiff suffered an injury and he could no longer lift or push heavy objects. After this injury, plaintiff
Read More
Plaintiff was a Hispanic corrections officer formerly employed by county corrections department. He filed a Title VII complaint against county alleging corrections department discriminated against him on basis of national origin by denying him the opportunity to return to the
Read More
Bedoya v. Hilti, Inc.
18 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D104b (S.D. Fla. Nov. 24, 2004)
2004-11-24
NATIONAL ORIGIN DISCRIMINATION
The plaintiff, a Columbian national, filed his claim under 42 U.S.C
Read More
Plaintiff Dorrego brought suit against his employer for violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for failing to promote him because of his national origin. The issue before the court was defendant's motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff applied for the "commercial account executive" (CAE) job, a new position that was created in his department. Defendant's intent was to create a new job for each of the employees in the marketing department. Plaintiff was selected for an interview for the CAE job but Reeves, another candidate for the CAE position, was hired instead and Defendant was offered a new position at a lower rate of pay than his then-current employment yielded. Plaintiff established a prima facie case of discrimination by showing he was of Hispanic ancestry, he was qualified for and applied for the CAE position, he was rejected for it and Reeves, who was not Hispanic, was selected. Plaintiff conceded that Defendant met its burden in establishing a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for failure to promote the plaintiff.
Plaintiff then argued that defendant made derogatory comments about other workers of Hispanic descent. However, the court found that evidence of those remarks were too attenuated in that they were not directed to the plaintiff specifically and were uttered three years prior to plaintiff's application for the CAE position. Plaintiff also asserted that he was "arguably more qualified" than Reeves. The court, however, found that did not meet the standard that disparities in qualifications must be one that "jumps off the page and slaps you in the face." Next, plaintiff argued that Reeves' preselection was evidence of pretext. Both parties stipulated that Reeves was the leading candidate at the outset of the selection process. The court found this evidence to be only neutral, at best.
After a review of the entire record, the court found that plaintiff did not show that defendant's proffered nondiscriminatory reasons for not promoting him were a mere pretext for discrimination based on national origin, in violation of Title VII. The circumstantial evidence of the anti-Hispanic remarks, without more, was insufficient to create an issue as to a material fact on pretext. Defendant's motion for summary judgment was granted.
Read More
The plaintiff is a Hispanic female formerly employed by the Orlando Police Department (OPD). The plaintiff was terminated while on her initial probationary status for violating OPD
Read More
CITY OF HIALEAH v. ROJAS
16 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C36 (11th Cir. November 8, 2002)
2002-11-08
NATIONAL ORIGIN DISCRIMINATION
Plaintiffs filed a class action suit against the City of Hialeah alleging national origin discrimination. Defendants argued that class certification was improperly granted because the plaintiffs failed to file a timely charge of discrimination with the EEOC. In the past the city had hired and then terminated Hispanic employees and classified them as
Read More
City of Hialeah v. Rojas
16 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C36 (11th Cir. November 8, 2002)
2002-11-08
NATIONAL ORIGIN DISCRIMINATION
Plaintiffs filed a class action suit against the City of Hialeah alleging national origin discrimination. Defendants argued that class certification was improperly granted because the plaintiffs had failed to file a timely charge of discrimination with the EEOC. In the past the city had hired and then terminated hispanic employees and classified them as
Read More
Employing a totality of the circumstances approach, and considering all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff, the Court concluded that fair-minded jurors could have reasonably concluded that Plaintiff suffered severe and pervasive harassment sufficient to alter the terms or conditions of his employment. The Court concluded that Plaintiff presented evidence sufficient to establish that Defendant had constructive knowledge of coworkers
Read More
Plaintiff, a white female over 40, alleged that she was discriminated against in connection with her non-promotion to the position of Manager of Management Services at the Miami-Dade Transit Agency. Plaintiff further alleged that her supervisors at the Transit Agency retaliated against her after she complained about the discriminatory treatment.
The Court found that Miami-Dade proffered a non-discriminatory and legitimate reason for Plaintiff
Read More
