A federal judge rejected claims of sex discrimination and retaliation filed by a female temporary worker against Ford Motor Co.
Instead, the court sided with Ford’s arguments that the plaintiff, Connisha Butler, violated the company’s anti-discrimination policy by using a racial slur and that Butler’s situation was not comparable to that of a regular full-time employee, according to filings.
Federal Judge Lindsay Jenkins issued a summary judgment in favor of the automaker on Sept. 5.
Butler had been working at the Chicago assembly plant from Sept. 17, 2018, through Dec. 20, 2018, when she was terminated.
Court records say the termination followed an incident that happened on Dec. 11, 2018, when Butler was working on the line while a female co-worker, who was on break, sat next to her.
At one point, a male co-worker, Stephan Malloy, arrived, and their discussion devolved. Butler admitted to calling Malloy profane names. She also alleged Malloy pointed his finger in her face and said, “You [b*****s] on this line be tweaking.” She also alleged Malloy threatened to have his girlfriend slap her.
Butler took a complaint about the argument to Ford’s labor relations department against the advice of a union representative who warned that things may not turn out as she wanted, according to court records.
An investigation by labor relations found witnesses who said Butler used the n-word in reference to Malloy. Witnesses also said that Malloy cursed at Butler and threatened to slap the female co-worker.
Butler denied using the n-word. However, labor relations charged Butler with “anti-harassment-race” and terminated her employment, according to court filings.
Both Butler and Malloy are Black.
Separately, the female coworker was given a one-day suspension for improper conduct to a fellow employee because she did not use profanity based on sex or race. She was also an “in progression” employee.
In her case, Butler argued Malloy did not receive the same discipline — termination of employment — as she did, despite both taking part in the same dispute that resulted in the plaintiff’s termination.
Malloy received a 30-day suspension.
Ford argued the two workers were not similarly situated, according to court filings. Butler was a “short-term supplemental,” or temporary, hourly worker, while Malloy was an “in progression” employee, considered full-time with seniority.
Short-term supplemental employees can be terminated without progressive discipline, unlike “in progression” employees.
Ford also argued Butler’s use of a racial slur violated its anti-discrimination policy, which the judge referred to in issuing summary judgment.
Butler also cited three gender discrimination lawsuits filed against Ford between 1999 and 2019. However, the court said Butler provided no other information about the case, nor did she connect the lawsuits to intentional discrimination.
The judge found Butler lacked evidence she was performing to Ford’s “legitimate expectations” or that similarly situated employees outside her protected class were treated more favorably.
SIA has reached out for additional comment to an attorney for the plaintiff and to Ford. The case number is 21-cv-1244.
