قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Insurance / Black former bank employee's reprisals reintroduced

Black former bank employee's reprisals reintroduced



A federal appellate court on Tuesday reinstated the retaliation lawsuit filed by a black former bank employee who said he was fired for opposing his bank's discriminatory actions.

Paul Scott, employed by Cincinnati-based US Bank National Association as a standard management support specialist in its underwriting department, received only positive reviews as well as a credit increase between March 2016 and January 2018, according to the judgment of the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans in Paul Scott v. US Bank National Association, which does business as US Bank.

In January 2018, Mr. Scott, a department head, told his immediate superior, a black man, that he "intended to lay off four African-American employees," the verdict said.

Scott warned employees. After one of them complained to the human resources department, an HR employee asked Mr. Scott to make a statement about the incident, which he did.

Mr. Scott claimed that although the bank had received assurances to the contrary, the bank began to take revenge on him for his actions, issued verbal warnings of poor performance and then terminated him.

Mr. Scott brought an action before the U.S. District Court in Dallas, accusing him of unlawful retaliation under the Civil Rights Act of 1

866. The court dismissed the case, but dismissed it by a unanimous three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals.

because we must at this stage of the proceedings, he has successfully relied on facts that may support a reasonable conviction "he was retaliated against, the verdict said.

Referring to the interrogation, the verdict said, "A supervisor's consideration of an employee's race when he decides to dismiss the employee is an illegal employment practice."

The district court had dismissed the interview and pointed out that the person he was talking to was also black, However, "Analyzing facts of this magnitude at the exercise-to-disc stage reflects the rigorous scrutiny" prohibited by a previous 5th Circuit ruling, the panel said, by turning to the lower court and referring the case back to the court. for further proceedings.

Attorneys. in the case did not respond to the request for comment.


Source link