|
|
|
Volunteer Firefighter Stated a Claim for Hostile Work Environment Based on Racial Harassment
(November 2009) By Tamiya N. Wilkes, Summer Associate.
For more information, contact Paul Farquharson.
Pernell Hammond v. Taneytown Volunteer Fire Company,
Civil Action No. CCB-09-0746 (D. Md. October 13, 2009)
Pernell Hammond ("Hammond") was employed as a volunteer
firefighter and emergency medical technician with the Taneytown Volunteer Fire
Company ("Fire Company"). Hammond was the only African-American person employed
by the Fire Company but resigned shortly after beginning his employment because
of frequent racial harassment by his co-workers and supervisor. Hammond's
co-workers frequently used racist epithets and berated African-American people
in front of him. Several firefighters began referring to Hammond using racist
epithets as well. The harassment led Hammond to submit a letter of resignation,
which he later revoked at the request of the President and Vice President of the
Fire Company, upon their assurances that the employees responsible for the
harassment would be disciplined. Nevertheless, the harassment continued. In
response to the harassment, Hammond conducted an interview with a local
newspaper. After the article was printed in the newspaper, Hammond began
receiving threatening phone calls and his car tires were slashed. The harassment
and threats ultimately led Hammond to resign from the Fire Company and move to a
different town.
Hammond filed suit against the Fire Company in the United
States District Court for the District of Maryland. Hammond alleged that the
Fire Company's actions violated MD. CODE ANN., CRIM. LAW § 10-304, which
prohibits hate crimes based on race, and that such violations constituted
wrongful discharge. Hammond also alleged that the Fire Company had violated 42
U.S.C. § 1981 by creating a hostile work environment and disparately treating
and retaliating against Hammond because of his race. The Fire Company filed a
Motion to Dismiss Hammond's Complaint, pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6).
The Court granted the Fire Company's Motion to Dismiss as to
the alleged violations of the criminal law statutes, holding that a violation of
MD. CODE ANN., CRIM. LAW § 10-304 did not amount to wrongful discharge and that
a claim for wrongful discharge was not available because Hammond had an
alternative statutory remedy, namely a cause of action for violation of 42
U.S.C. § 1981.
To succeed on a claim for a racially hostile work
environment, under Fourth Circuit law, the employee must show that the
harassment was: 1) unwelcome, 2) based on race, 3) sufficiently severe or
pervasive to alter the conditions of employment, and 4) and there was some basis
for imposing liability on the employer. Based on those elements, the Court held
that Hammond had sufficiently stated a claim for violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981.
The Court, therefore, denied the Fire Company's Motion to Dismiss and determined
that Hammond's claim could go forward.
|
|
|
Top
