The case is a bit complex, perhaps because of the order in which the events transpired. The employee, Courtney Satterwhite, heard his then-colleague, Harry Singh, make a remark referencing Hitler that Satterwhite claimed offended a third employee. Even though Singh apologized to the co-worker he’d reportedly offended, Satterwhite reported the remark to the city’s HR director, which resulted in Singh being formally reprimanded.
Some months later and despite the reprimand, Singh was promoted to a position in which he became Satterwhite’s supervisor. In that capacity, Singh reprimanded and disciplined Satterwhite more than once, which subsequently resulted in the latter’s demotion and salary cut.
After the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission gave Satterwhite the green light to take legal action, he sued the City for retaliation under Title VII, claiming that he had participated in “protected activities” under the law in filing his complaint about Singh and for taking part in an investigation into Singh’s behavior.
Even though the appeals court upheld the lower court’s summary judgment in favor of the city, indicating that a one-time ethnic reference does not constitute a protected retaliation claim under Title VII, the potential for such inflammatory language to create a “hostile work environment” should give HR managers pause.