Question

Case 2: Jackson v. Plainfield Healthcare Center, 612 F.3d 908 (7th Cir. 2010) (Mallor 15th p. 1349).

The following facts are inspired by, but change and expand upon, the facts appearing in the above cited case.

Two residents of Wheatfield Healthcare Center, a privately run nursing home employing more than 50 employees, requested that only white employees provide their care. Wheatfield complied with its residents' racial preference partly due to its interpretation of a state regulation governing long-term care facilities, which supposedly gave residents the right to “choose a personal attending physician and other providers of services.”

Supervisors at Wheatfield instructed Jennifer Jackson, who worked as a certified nursing assistant (CNA) and who was the only African-American employee at Wheatfield, about the care restrictions for these residents. In addition, the shift assignment sheet, which Jackson received every day, included a notation next the residents' names stating, “No Black CNA!” Jackson found this embarrassing and frustrating; however, to keep a job she badly needed, she did not complain and complied with the restriction. Nonetheless, she believed this situation contributed to a general air of hostility toward her. Several employees used vulgar racial epithets to refer to Jackson. One white employee complained loudly that Wheatfield should stop hiring black employees because it made more work for her. Jackson's friend, Arnie Lucas, complained to the human resources department on Jackson's behalf about the co-workers' behavior. Shortly thereafter, Lucas was placed on probation, making him ineligible for overtime shifts.

Jackson badly injured her back helping a resident into bed. She required extensive surgical care, physical therapy, and rehabilitation. When she was ready to return to work, her doctor restricted how much weight she could lift. The restriction was expected to be permanent. Jackson's supervisor refused to allow her to return to work with the restriction and, eventually, Jackson was fired.

Wheatfield required all of its healthcare workers to submit to periodic mandatory drug tests. Not wanting Jackson to get any unemployment compensation after her termination, Wheatfield's president and CEO instructed Bettina Collins, the human resources manager, to testify falsely at Jackson's eligibility hearing that Jackson had failed her last drug test. When Collins refused to lie, she was fired.

1. Jackson has provided indirect evidence of racial discrimination in employment thereby triggering the McDonnel-Douglas shifting burden of proof: her supervisors’ shift assignment notations about her race and the harassing behavior of its employees which subjected her to a hostile work environment.
2. Wheatfield cannot justify its restricting Jackson from working with residents who expressed a racial preference as a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) necessary to give residents the right to “choose a personal attending physician and other providers of services.”
3. Lucas lacks a valid claim for unlawful discrimination under Title VII, because there is no indication he was discriminated against because he is a member of a protected class.
4. Jackson is entitled to workers’ compensation benefits for her injured back and, upon her return to work, to a reasonable accommodation that allows her to perform the essential functions of her job. She is also entitled to unemployment compensation benefits upon her being fired and unpaid leave while she recovers from her injuries.
5. Assuming Bettina Collins is an employee at will, she can be fired by Wheatfield at any time with or without cause, and Wheatfield has no liability for wrongful discharge from employment.

Answer 1

1. Jackson has provided indirect evidence of racial discrimination in employment thereby triggering the McDonnel-Douglas shifting burden of proof: her supervisors’ shift assignment notations about her race and the harassing behavior of its employees which subjected her to a hostile work environment. – False

2. Wheatfield cannot justify its restricting Jackson from working with residents who expressed a racial preference as a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) necessary to give residents the right to “choose a personal attending physician and other providers of services.”- True

3. Lucas lacks a valid claim for unlawful discrimination under Title VII, because there is no indication he was discriminated against because he is a member of a protected class.- False (Lucas was a whistle blower)

4. Jackson is entitled to workers’ compensation benefits for her injured back and, upon her return to work, to a reasonable accommodation that allows her to perform the essential functions of her job. She is also entitled to unemployment compensation benefits upon her being fired and unpaid leave while she recovers from her injuries. – True

5. Assuming Bettina Collins is an employee at will, she can be fired by Wheatfield at any time with or without cause, and Wheatfield has no liability for wrongful discharge from employment.- True