The U.S. Supreme Court recently rejected a gender bias lawsuit filed by a former Proctor & Gamble employee that was dismissed by a and upheld by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The employee claimed she was fired due to discrimination, but the court ruled that she didn’t prove her case. In her petition to the high court, the employee argued that multiple factors can be the cause for termination and that she was denied due process. P&G declined to comment, and the employee’s lawyer couldn’t be reached for comment.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964’s Title VII prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The 11th Circuit court concluded that the Proctor & Gamble employee failed to establish that a male colleague wasn’t terminated for breaching the same policies.
Demonstrating pretext is crucial in discrimination and retaliation cases. In a recent example, the 8th Circuit upheld a lower court’s decision that a worker’s firing was due to “numerous performance deficiencies” rather than as revenge for medical absences. The employee was unable to show that the stated reasons for termination were just a pretext for retaliation.
In December, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a white nurse was terminated from an assisted living facility in Kansas not because of racial bias but due to allegations of neglecting job responsibilities and unprofessional conduct.
HR professionals have long been advised to prioritize documentation when carrying out HR processes, as it can help defend against allegations of discriminatory pretext. In a 2019 case, for instance, an employer successfully refuted a discrimination claim by presenting memos that revealed the company’s intention to terminate the employee as part of a larger restructuring plan. This documentation predated the incident the former employee used as evidence for her claim, highlighting the significance of documentation in defending against such allegations.
The recent rejection of the gender bias lawsuit filed against Proctor & Gamble serves as a reminder of the challenges employees face in proving discrimination in the workplace. To successfully bring a claim of discrimination, employees must not only establish a prima facie case of discrimination but also demonstrate that the employer’s proffered reasons for the adverse employment action were a pretext for discrimination. This burden of proof is often difficult to meet, as evidenced by the cases discussed in this article. HR professionals should, therefore, prioritize clear and comprehensive documentation of all employment decisions to help protect their organizations from allegations of discriminatory pretext. By doing so, they can not only mitigate legal risk but also create a more equitable and inclusive workplace culture for all employees.