- within Tax, Real Estate and Construction and Environment topic(s)
- with readers working within the Insurance industries
Employers often discipline—or even terminate—employees who use racial slurs at work. But what if an employee uses a slur for his own minority group? And what if he argues that, in context, it was “cultural” usage? A federal court in Pennsylvania grappled with this question, and its decision offers lessons for employers.
The case involved a Black employee who used the N-word after a frustrating interaction with a coworker. His employer terminated him for using inappropriate language. The employee sued under state and federal law, arguing that the employer discriminated against him because of his race and “cultural folkways.”
In its ruling, the court recognized that the case raised “a difficult societal question about who should be allowed to say which words in a workplace.” While the societal question was difficult, the legal question was not. The court ruled that there was no illegal discrimination.
Why did this “difficult societal question” raise “only easy questions of law”?
Simple: according to the court, the employer showed consistent enforcement of its conduct policy. Its records established that it disciplined employees of all races who used the N-word at work. And while the employee argued that three employees were only warned—not terminated—for using the N-word, these employees were themselves Black. Accordingly, there was no evidence that Black employees were treated more harshly for the same conduct.
Although this is a trial court decision that does not create binding precedent, it offers key takeaways for employers:
- Workplace conduct policies provide the most protection when they are applied consistently.
- Exceptions can raise questions about motive.
- The employees who only received warnings belonged to the same protected group as the plaintiff. But what if they hadn’t? The employer’s case could have become more complicated.
- Training is key.
- To ensure consistency, supervisors must know how to recognize and respond appropriately to policy violations.
- Don’t forget to document.
- The employer’s records established that the employee was treated the same as other workers who committed similar violations of the workplace policy.
- This was key in rebutting the employee’s speculation that the policy could have been applied unfairly.
This case shows that consistent application of neutral policies is always the safest option.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
