Former Employee Discovers Hostile Workplace Does Not Equate to Hostile Work Environment

Employees frequently complain of an unhappy workplace and describe it as a “hostile work environment.”  While hostility may be part of what makes an organization a bad place to work, it does not necessarily constitute a hostile work environment under workplace discrimination law.  In Jensen v. College Town Pizza, Inc., the plaintiff was subjected to several rude behaviors from co-workers and supervisors.  The court, however, did not find that any of the conduct rose to the level of a cognizable claim under discrimination laws.

Jensen, a Native American, was a delivery driver for Domino’s Pizza in New Hope, Minnesota.  During his time working for the organization, he alleged having problems with a while male co-worker, and informed his manager about their strained relationship.  The manager responded by moving Jensen off of a shift, and reducing his hours to keep the two from working together.  His manager also failed to report to law enforcement that he received a death threat from a customer, and called him a name in front of customers.

Finally, Jensen quit after he was scheduled to close one weekend shift when he had informed his employer he no longer wished to work that shift.  Jensen sued, alleging he was forced to quit due the discriminatory treatment he received, alleging disparate treatment discrimination and/or a hostile work environment based on his race and national origin.  College Town moved to dismiss, arguing that Jensen failed to state a claim of discrimination.

First, the court dismissed any claims related to discrimination based on national origin, as national origin discrimination is not a recognized claim under 42 U.S.C. §1981.  With regard to Jensen’s race-based claims of discrimination, the court found that Jensen did not plead any factual allegations that tied the negative treatment he received to his race.  “A plaintiff must initially plead and ultimately prove that, but for race, [he] would not have suffered the loss of a legally protected right.”

The court found that the complaint contained no factual allegations that tied the negative treatment Jensen described to his race, but were rather complaints about how he had a bad manager.  “While such allegations indicate that Jensen experienced unpleasant interactions or even personally targeted actions, nowhere does the Complaint tie the manager’s conduct to Jensen’s race.”

Regarding his hostile work environment, the court stated that for purposes of section 1981 claims, a hostile workplace is one “permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim’s employment and create an abusive working environment….Occasional offensive conduct is not sufficiently severe or pervasive to establish a cause of action.”  The court found that the incidents described were unprofessional, but did not reach the level of severity or pervasiveness to establish a hostile work environment claim.  With that, the motion to dismiss was granted.

This case is a perfect example of the difference between a difficult workplace and a hostile work environment.  While the employer could have been better at addressing employee issues, the conduct that led to the employee resigning did not rise to the severity level required for a claim.  If you, or your organization, need assistance in monitoring employee conduct or responding to employee claims of discrimination, contact Wiley Reber Law, for legal advice that works.