California Supreme Court Rules Single “Slur” Sufficient for Employer Liability
On July 29, 2024, the California Supreme Court ruled that a single discriminatory “slur”” uttered in the workplace is sufficient to establish employer liability for discrimination. In the case of Twanda Bailey v. San Francisco District Attorney’s Office, et al., the court held that the employer is liable for a breach of the state’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). Here, our California employer litigation attorney provides a more detailed overview of the decision from the ‘state’s highest court and highlights the implications for businesses and organizations.
Case Review: Twanda Bailey v. San Francisco District ‘Attorney’s Office, et al.
Background & Facts
The plaintiff, Twanda Bailey, is an African-American female who brought a racial harassment claim on the grounds that a co-worker called her a racial slur in the workplace. She also claimed that she was subject to retaliation by her employer after she raised the issue to her supervisors. Initially, Ms. Bailey’s claim under FEHA was dismissed by a trial court.
The Legal Issue
The undisputed facts are that Ms. Bailey was subject to a racial slur from her co-worker, with whom she shared an office. The co-worker used the slur one time, and Ms. Bailey made no other allegations of specific racial harassment. The question before the court: Can a coworker’s one-time use of a slur be sufficient to constitute racial harassment under FEHA?
The Decision
Upon appeal, the California Supreme Court found in favor of Twanda Bailey. It ruled that Ms. Bailey was subject to unlawful racial harassment—a hostile work environment—based on a coworker’s single utterance of a racial slur. The court noted that the slur in question was especially “powerful” given the slur’s history of use in America. As such, the court found that the use of that slur is so severe that it constitutes a hostile work environment. Indeed, the court wrote that the specific slur carries “the stinging barbs of history, which catch and tear the psyche the way thorns tear at skin.”
Implications for Employers
This case has important implications for employers in California. Our state’s highest court’s opinion is clear that even a single use of a “powerful” racial slur in the workplace by a coworker could potentially be deemed a hostile work environment under FEHA. It is unclear from this decision whether other less “powerful” slurs, or a single discriminatory comment about other protected categories – age, disability, gender, etc. – would trigger enough evidence of a hostile work environment under FEHA to be actionable. Nevertheless, California businesses and other organizations should engage in proactive anti-discrimination training and take any allegations of racial or other harassment seriously. Failure to do so could expose a business to the risk of facing legal liability through a discrimination and/or retaliation claim.
Get Help From Our California Employment Lawyer Today
At Sloat Law Group, APC we are an employment litigation law firm that has considerable experience helping employers solve problems. If you have any questions about a specific matter, please do not hesitate to contact us today for your confidential initial case assessment. Our firm represents employers throughout California, including in Coachella Valley and Riverside County.
Source:
courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S265223.PDF
