Legal tip: Hire, fire fairly and don’t sweat discrimination claims

We’ve all fretted over claims of discrimination by disgruntled employees. Breathe easier. Fair and equal practices by the hotel will protect against liability. Gone are the days when an applicant or employee’s minority status alone suggests the deck is stacked against the hotel. A recent case reinforces tougher standards faced by workers claiming to be victims of prejudice. Fair and equitable practices by the hotel will protect against liability.

The lawsuit involves an African-American female plaintiff who applied for a job as an income auditor for a Texas Hilton. Although the plaintiff claims she was told at the interview she would likely get the job (baaaad practice), the hotel hired an Asian female. Hilton later offered the plaintiff a job as a general cashier and she accepted. Soon after, a $100 shortage was discovered. An investigation was inconclusive as to who done it. Thereafter, a $21,000 shortage occurred from an account for which the plaintiff was responsible. The hotel attempted to find the missing money but without success. Per its policy, police were notified. Following an investigation, the plaintiff was arrested and indicted for theft. No surprise, Hilton terminated the plaintiff’s employment.

Surprise, the plaintiff sued the hotel. She asserted two counts of race and gender discrimination, the first relating to the selection process for the income auditor position, and the second to her termination from the cashier’s job.

Discrimination cases have a certain rhythm mandated by relevant law. The plaintiff must first present evidence showing the following: she belongs to a racial minority, she applied and was qualified for the internal auditor position, she was not hired, and the person offered the job was not African-American. To avoid liability, Hilton must then prove a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason why the plaintiff was passed over. Finally, the plaintiff gets a chance to show that the employer’s proffered reason is merely a pretext for discrimination.

Hilton was able to show that the Asian woman hired had better qualifications, including a college degree from Conrad N. Hilton College at the University of Houston, with which Hilton has a long-standing close relationship. Further, per Hilton policy, a degree is necessary to be considered for promotion beyond income auditor. The plaintiff did not have a degree. Additionally, the court noted, “[the person hired] also had a strong knowledge base for understanding complex, computerized financial systems, which is required for an Income Auditor position.” The plaintiff touted her previous auditing experience, which the person hired did not have. The court noted, however, that such experience was not a published requirement for the job. Given these circumstances, the court was satisfied a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason existed. Claim dismissed.

The plaintiff’s lawsuit also asserted (incredibly!) that her termination from the cashier position was based on her status as an African-American female. Hilton asserted as a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason the missing $21,000 for which plaintiff as cashier was responsible. No surprise, this, too, was a sufficient legitimate nondiscriminatory reason. Claim dismissed.

The moral of the case is this: Treat all applicants and employees fairly and equally. If good grounds exist to terminate, demote or decline employment, don’t be deterred by fear of a discrimination lawsuit.