A few racist comments are not enough for a jury trial on Title VII discrimination claim

The plaintiff does not have a discrimination case under Title VII simply because she was exposed to a few racist comments. That's the holding in this ruling from the Second Circuit, demonstrating the evidentiary hurdles facing these claims.

The case is Langlois v. Hartford Board of Education, a summary order issued on October 27. Plaintiff alleges disparate treatment and hostile work environment on account of race. The Second Circuit (Livingston, Chin and Engelmayer [D.J.]) assumes plaintiff made out a prima facie case of discrimination and proceeds to the question of whether the employer's reason for plaintiff's adverse treatment was a pretext for discrimination. Plaintiff identifies two racist comments allegedly made by the school principal: (1) "students should have teachers that look like them," and (2) "white teachers could not, are not competent to teach our students." Plaintiff is white. The first comment was made at a teacher's meeting. The second statement was made at an unspecified meeting. 

These comments can win the case in certain circumstances. But not this case, the Second Circuit holds, because they are "stray remarks," though the Court agrees these remarks are "troubling." This being a summary affirmance, Court does not provide the context for these comments, except it notes that an outside consultant and not the principal was responsible for providing the performance reviews that precipitated plaintiff's departure from the school. My guess is that, since the principal was not responsible for the reviews, the racist comments attributed to the principal did not evidentiary value.

Plaintiff also has a hostile work environment claim. To win such a claim, you have to show the racist comments or race-related adverse actions were severe or pervasive. The Court says plaintiff cannot prove her claim.

Indeed, the bulk of the conduct she complains of is reasonably expected in the school working environment: late-night emails about work-related matters, evaluations and follow-up meetings concerning work performance, criticism related to classroom management  and teaching, occasional rude interactions with  bosses, and placement on a performance support plan after subpar evaluations. Second, Langlois has not demonstrated that, taken together, her allegations amount to a continuous or concerted series of incidents establishing a hostile work environment. The few isolated comments allegedly made by the school principal, mentioned previously, do not meet  this  threshold.