Civil Rights Act: Promise Unfulfilled
Congress enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to achieve equality of employment opportunities. More than half a century later, race discrimination remains all too prevalent. We are deeply committed to achieving the promise of the Civil Rights Act by vigorously combatting race discrimination in the workplace.
U.S. News and Best Lawyers® have named Zuckerman Law a Tier 1 firm in Litigation – Labor and Employment in the Washington DC metropolitan area. Contact us today to find out how we can help you.To schedule a preliminary consultation about race discrimination, call us at 202-769-1681, or click here.
Click here to see our videos answering frequently asked questions about discrimination and retaliation.
Forms of Race Discrimination
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits an employer from “discriminat[ing] against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1).
Race discrimination can take many forms, including:
- Termination of employment;
- Denial of a promotion;
- Racial slurs in the workplace;
- Pay disparity; and
- Denial of training opportunities.
Proving Race Discrimination
Race discrimination can be proven through direct or circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence consists of a specific link between the alleged discriminatory animus and the challenged adverse employment action sufficient to support a finding that an illegitimate criterion motivated the action. An example of direct evidence is an admission by a manager that he fired an employee due to the employee’s race.
Direct evidence is rare, so most race discrimination cases are proven through circumstantial evidence, typically using the burden-shifting framework set forth in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973). Under McDonnell Douglas, the discrimination plaintiff must show:
- plaintiff is a member of a protected class;
- plaintiff suffered an adverse employment action; and
- the unfavorable action gives rise to an inference of discrimination.
“[A]n individual plaintiff may establish a prima facie case by `showing actions taken by the employer from which one can infer, if such actions remain unexplained, that it is more likely than not that such actions were based on a discriminatory criterion illegal under’ Title VII.” `not intended to be an inflexible rule.'” Young v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 135 S. Ct. 1338, 1353 (2015)
Once the employee establishes a prima facie case of discrimination, the burden shifts to the employer to articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the adverse action. Once the employer meets that burden of production, the plaintiff has an opportunity to prove that the reasons offered by the defendant were not the true reasons for the adverse action. This is also knows as the burden to show pretext. Evidence of pretext may include “the employer’s better treatment of similarly situated employees outside the plaintiff’s protected group, its inconsistent or dishonest explanations, its deviation from established procedures or criteria, or the employer’s pattern of poor treatment of other employees in the same protected group as the plaintiff, or other relevant evidence that a jury could reasonably conclude evinces an illicit motive.” Walker v. Johnson, 798 F.3d 1085, 1092 (D.C. Cir. 2015).
There is no requirement to prove retaliatory animus: If a plaintiff can show that she was fired under suspicious circumstances and that her employer lied about its reasons for firing her, the factfinder may infer that the employer’s undisclosed retaliatory animus was the actual cause of her termination. Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc., 530 U.S. 133, 143, 120 S.Ct. 2097, 147 L.Ed.2d 105 (2000).
Race Discrimination Attorneys Serving Maryland, Virginia and Washington DC
We are are deeply committed to combatting race discrimination in the workplace and achieving the long overdue unfulfilled promise of the Civil Rights Act.
Eric Bachman, Chair of the Firm’s Discrimination Practice, has substantial experience representing workers in race discrimination cases both in private practice and at the Department of Justice. Several of the cases he has litigated establish important precedent for victims of discrimination. His wins include a $100 million settlement in a disparate impact Title VII class action and a $16 million class action settlement against a major grocery chain. And his experience as a public defender enables him to feel at home in any courtroom and communicate effectively with the jury.
Having served as Special Litigation Counsel in the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice and as lead or co-counsel in numerous jury trials, Bachman is trial-tested and ready to fight for you to obtain the relief that you deserve.
Contact us today to find out how we can help you with a race discrimination case. To schedule a preliminary consultation about race discrimination, call us at 202-769-1681, or click here.
1629 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
By Appointment Only
5425 Wisconsin Avenue
Chevy Chase, MD 20815
By Appointment Only
1934 Old Gallows
Tysons, VA 22182
By Appointment Only