Employment Discrimination Once Removed- The Cat’s Paw
Here is an interesting twist on wrongful termination and race discrimination. Is the employer liable under federal anti-discrimination laws when the manager who did the firing had no discriminatory motive but the person recommending the firing had a discriminatory animus? This situation is commonly referred to as “Cat’s Paw.”
The Supreme Court has agreed to take just such a case and help us all determine the answer. In BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co v. EEOC, an HR manager decided to fire an employee she didn't know, based mainly on information from a supervisor. The supervisor has a history of racism. So the question is whether the employer is insulated from liability because the manager didn't even know the employee’s protected status as a racial minority. It should be noted that there was an independent review of the terminated employee’s personnel file.
This decision could have a serious impact on employment litigation. Should the Supreme Court decide not to hold the employer liable they have created a shield for racial discrimination at lower levels. Should they find liability then employers will have to increase vigilance and let the litigation ensue as to how much vigilance and review is enough to avoid a Title VII lawsuit in a cat’s paw situation.
