United States District Court for the District of Kansas · 2019-06-27
42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)
Case and law context
Role: applied; posture: civil; Title VII (and Kansas Act) "reverse" national-origin discrimination by an American employee of a French-managed firm: hostile work environment, retaliation, constructive discharge; employer's Rule 12(b)(6) motion denied on all three, granted only on a separate failure-to-conciliate claim (D. Kan.); result: claimant-won; claim: (a)
Uncertainty
other: result is recorded for the Title VII discrimination/retaliation theories, all of which survive the motion to dismiss; the only claim dismissed ("failure to conciliate", 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5) is not a 2000e-2 theory. If the convention is per-motion, this is `mixed`.
Misfit
None recorded
B · Case × element grid
Top-level elements follow claim order in panels of up to six elements. Case rows repeat across panels. Every recorded block retains its holding and basis; multiple blocks are not merged into a case-level verdict. ✓ satisfied · ✗ not satisfied · ○ not reached · · not addressed. Muted blocks are not counted. Sub-element evidence remains on case and element pages.
Elements 1–6 of 33
| Case | Covered entity: employer, employment agency, or labor organization | Protected trait: race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy/abortion), or national origin | Adverse employment action affecting compensation, terms, conditions, privileges, or status | Discriminatory causation ("because of" protected trait) | adverse-action-a2 statutory route or exception | employment-agency-route statutory route or exception |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beck v. Figeac Aero N. Am., Inc. — 382 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Kansas · 2019 (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 7–12 of 33
| Case | labor-organization-route statutory route or exception | training-program statutory route or exception | Impermissible motivating factor in mixed-motive cases (§ 2000e-2(m)) | Bona fide occupational qualification (§ 2000e-2(e)(1)) | Severe or pervasive hostile or abusive working environment | Particular employment practice causing a disparate impact on a protected group |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beck v. Figeac Aero N. Am., Inc. — 382 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Kansas · 2019 (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 13–18 of 33
| Case | Bona fide seniority/merit system or professionally developed ability test (§ 2000e-2(h)) | Failure to reasonably accommodate religious observance or practice (§§ 2000e-2(a)(1), 2000e(j)) | Retaliation for protected Title VII activity (42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a)) | communist-organization statutory route or exception | Employer's legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason (McDonnell Douglas step 2) | indian-preference statutory route or exception |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beck v. Figeac Aero N. Am., Inc. — 382 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Kansas · 2019 (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 19–24 of 33
| Case | Subsection (n) limits challenges to covered litigated or consent judgments or orders | judgment-order-scope statutory route or exception | k2-intentional-limit statutory route or exception | k3-controlled-substance statutory route or exception | labor-organization-causation statutory route or exception | national-security statutory route or exception |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beck v. Figeac Aero N. Am., Inc. — 382 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Kansas · 2019 (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 25–30 of 33
| Case | no-preference-imbalance statutory route or exception | Pretext for discrimination (McDonnell Douglas step 3) | Qualified for the position / meeting legitimate employer expectations | religious-institution statutory route or exception | test-score-discrimination statutory route or exception | Rejected "bottom-line" racial or gender balance defense to a discriminatory pass/fail barrier (Connecticut v. Teal) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beck v. Figeac Aero N. Am., Inc. — 382 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Kansas · 2019 (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 31–33 of 33
| Case | Strong-basis-in-evidence defense for race-conscious action taken to avoid disparate-impact liability (Ricci v. DeStefano) | Rejected defense that an adverse CBA arbitration precludes a Title VII action (Alexander v. Gardner-Denver) | Mixed-motive same-decision partial affirmative defense (42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(g)(2)(B)) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Beck v. Figeac Aero N. Am., Inc. — 382 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Kansas · 2019 (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beck v. Figeac Aero N. Am., Inc. — 382 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Kansas · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Adverse employment action affecting compensation, terms, conditions, privileges, or status | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: pleaded; claim: (a) Whether a reasonable employee would actually have resigned is expressly left for later in the litigation. | resigned-same-day-as-retaliatory-probation-after-manager's-abuse | In response to being placed on probation, Beck quit her job with Figeac later that day.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [2018:2105] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.Benaoum allegedly displayed physically violent tendencies.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [11779:11837] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.A plaintiff must show that a reasonable person would be compelled to resign due to conditions that were objectively intolerable created by the illegal discriminatory conduct of the employer.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [10932:11122] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.These facts, assumed as true, might make a reasonable employee feel compelled to resign.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [11954:12042] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.Beck has stated a plausible claim for constructive discharge.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [11564:11625] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919. |
| Beck v. Figeac Aero N. Am., Inc. — 382 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Kansas · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Covered entity: employer, employment agency, or labor organization | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: pleaded; claim: (a) Not contested. | aerospace-parts-company-with-french-manager | Beck worked as a buyer for Figeac from January to April, 2017.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [803:865] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919. |
| Beck v. Figeac Aero N. Am., Inc. — 382 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Kansas · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Severe or pervasive hostile or abusive working environment | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: pleaded; claim: (a) The court notes the frequency of the conduct is unclear from the complaint but infers it from HR's acknowledgment; the conduct need not have been directed at the plaintiff. | manager's-repeated-anti-american-slurs-and-table-striking-outbursts-over-three-months | Beck, who is American, alleges that during that time her manager, Hocine Benaoum, who is French, referred to some employees as "stupid Americans," referred to American employees as "f*cking stupid," and referred to one employee as "nothing but a God D*mned American buyer."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [866:1139] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.Beck alleges that Benaoum displayed violent tendencies toward American employees but not French employees, stating that Benaoum would regularly "strike tables, walls, and other things while screaming at American employees."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [1140:1363] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.The conduct requires more than "run-of-the-mill boorish, juvenile, or annoying behavior"-rather, severe discriminatory conduct must permeate the workplace.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [7460:7615] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.This suggests the conduct complained of was ongoing rather than isolated incidences.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [8363:8447] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.Beck has brought enough factual allegations to plausibly claim hostile work environment under Title VII.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [7832:7936] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919. |
| Beck v. Figeac Aero N. Am., Inc. — 382 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Kansas · 2019 — satisfied · law (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Protected trait: race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy/abortion), or national origin | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: law; claim: (a); theory: whether Title VII protects Americans against national-origin discrimination at all; subject: theory=whether Title VII protects Americans against national-origin discrimination at all | american-national-origin | Title VII prohibits discrimination on the basis of a person's national origin, which is where the person was born or where her ancestors came from.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [5250:5397] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.Although Title VII's purpose is to erase disadvantage of minorities, so called "reverse discrimination" or discrimination against the majority is also prohibited.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [5398:5560] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.Granted, the Court is unaware of any binding authority that has addressed reverse discrimination in the context of national origin discrimination claims; courts have allowed Title VII reverse discrimination claims in other contexts and the Court concludes that the same reasoning applies here.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [5561:5854] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919. |
| Beck v. Figeac Aero N. Am., Inc. — 382 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Kansas · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Protected trait: race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy/abortion), or national origin | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: pleaded; claim: (a); theory: whether the majority-group plaintiff pleaded the "abnormal employer" background circumstances; subject: theory=whether the majority-group plaintiff pleaded the "abnormal employer" background circumstances | hr-acknowledged-and-tolerated-manager's-anti-american-conduct | According to Beck, the HR representative "acknowledged the harassment and the discrimination towards Americans" but told Beck "that's just the way [Benaoum] is."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [1713:1874] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.Beck never specifies how many of the employees under Benaoum's supervision were American, French, or some other nationality.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [1481:1605] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.A party claiming reverse discrimination must bring sufficient background evidence to show (1) the employer is abnormal in that it discriminates against the majority or (2) but for the plaintiff's status, the challenged actions would not have occurred.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [5855:6106] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.Based on these facts, it is plausible that Figeac is an abnormal employer because it discriminates against the majority.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [6565:6685] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919. |
| Beck v. Figeac Aero N. Am., Inc. — 382 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Kansas · 2019 — satisfied · pleaded (42usc2000e-2: author: Flash2 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Retaliation for protected Title VII activity (42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a)) | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: pleaded; claim: (a) Only protected opposition and material adversity were contested; causation was not argued. The HR complaints were also held to be protected opposition. | probation-imposed-after-repeated-hr-complaints | Beck complained to the company's Human Resources Department ("HR") multiple times about Benaoum's conduct.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [1606:1712] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.Subsequently, on April 7, Figeac placed Beck on probation.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [1875:1933] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.A reasonable employee will find the action materially adverse when the action might dissuade the reasonable worker from making or supporting a discrimination claim.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [9596:9760] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919.The Court disagrees because probation is a negative disciplinary action an employer can take to dissuade an employee.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_382.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/382/1170-01; Unicode character offsets [10472:10589] (end exclusive); SHA-256 bf0e94769a9c76f63453f558a56b227b214ef9156a48d4a1c1aac4c3a3426919. |