![]() ![]() On Monday, the Supreme Court followed the predictable course and denied Collier's petition. The hospital also disputed Collier's assertion of a split among the federal circuits on whether a single use of the n-word makes a workplace hostile, arguing that appellate courts have reached varying conclusions based on each case's unique facts. Parkland said it was not clear that Collier, who was fired for insubordination after refusing a supervisor's instruction to work in a particular area of the hospital, had ever reported the graffiti to human resources officials. The hospital's lawyers at Carter Arnett provided the Supreme Court with plenty of rationales for denying review in their brief opposing certiorari. Collier's lawyers presented his case as an opportunity for the Supreme Court to decide whether that exposure alone was enough to send Collier's claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to a jury trial. He alleged Dallas' Parkland Hospital failed for months to remove graffiti of the n-word that was etched into the wall of an elevator he and other Black employees used to access the hospital cafeteria. It's rare, after all, for the Supreme Court to grant review of any case – and Collier's would have presented unique challenges for the court. Supreme Court to decide whether his exposure to the most racially offensive word in the American vernacular was so dehumanizing that he was entitled to sue the hospital for creating a hostile workplace. (Reuters) - The odds were always way against Robert Collier, the Black former hospital aide who petitioned the U.S. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |