Nickname’s easier to pronounce: Discrimination?
July 24, 2009 by Sam NarisiPosted in: Employment law, National origin discrimination
Words are tricky — sometimes an employee will interpret a manager’s comments in a way the supervisor never intended. Take this scenario, based on a real-life court case:
“Have a seat,” HR manager Lynn Rondo said as supervisor Todd Koehler walked into her office. “I have a few questions about Chekandino Miller.”
“OK, fire away,” said Todd. “What do you want to know?”
“What’s the story behind his nickname?” she asked. “Chekandino is suing us for racial bias.”
“What? That’s ridiculous,” said Todd, shaking his head.
“Well, he’s pointing the finger at you. That’s why I called you in. We need to discuss this nickname – and a couple of other issues, too.”
What’s in a name?
“Oh, please! His nickname is ‘Dino.’ How is using his nickname discriminating against him?”
Lynn sighed. “Chekandino said you referred to him as Dino because it sounds less African than his given name.”
Todd stared at her. “You’re kidding.”
“He also claims you approved time off for his white co-workers, but not for him,” said Lynn.
“No way. The other guys put in for vacation time before he did. First come, first served is my policy. And the nickname is the craziest part. Dino is just easier to pronounce. Even his wife calls him Dino.”
Chekandino sued, claiming racial discrimination. The company tried to get the case thrown out.
Did the company win?
Answer:
No, the company lost.
The company said the managers hadn’t discriminated against Chekandino because he’d given out vacation on a first-come, first-served basis. The company’s lawyers even got ‘Dino’ to admit his wife called him by that nickname.
But the judge looked at the supervisor’s decisions – denying earned vacation time and refusing to call the employee by his given African name – and concluded the string of events may have been racially motivated.
Alone, the nickname didn’t amount to bias, but when combined with the other circumstances, a jury might find the supervisor’s actions were motivated by bias, said the judge.
Now the company faces a costly trial – or an expensive settlement.
Analysis: Comments may amount to bias in court
In today’s litigious world, your managers can get your company in trouble with just a small slip of the tongue. Words count. Offhand comments may not seem like much, but what’s innocuous to a supervisor may well be obnoxious to an employee.
Which means it’s more important than ever to stress to your managers the importance of watching what they say – your company could end up in court if they don’t.
Cite: Tefera v. City Center Parking
Tags: national origin, nicknames
July 29th, 2009 at 10:31 am
What a stretch this is!
As an HR profession sitting on the potential jury…linking the nick name to an employee’s late decision on requesting vacation time would never happen. This case is a frivolous waste of court time and corporate money.
July 29th, 2009 at 11:30 am
So . . . If his wife calls him ‘Dino’ and then refuses to let him go out on Friday night because he didn’t arrange it in enough time to get a sitter for the kids, should he sue her for discrimination too?
July 29th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
This is ridiculous. His wife calls him Dino. The vacation policy was adhered to. But this guy probably gets money? For *what?* It’s this kind of thing that makes employers afraid to manage their own employees. Madness.
July 30th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Absolutely maddening! What a joke! Another frivolous lawsuit…someone saw an opportunity for a big payday.
July 30th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
I agree with CM, DINO saw the opportunity for the lottery!
July 30th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Now there is a judge who should be disbarred ……
July 31st, 2009 at 7:15 am
Basing the decision on PTO is ridiculous especially if there is documentation proving that other individuals requested PTO first and that Chekandino’s request for PTO conflicted with those individuals or the work schedule. However, the case itself is not ridiculous, assuming appropriate action was taken – expressed concern to supervisor and/or complained to HR. The story leaves out information that should have been considered – (1) whether Chekandino expressed his preference to be called by his given name to his supervisor, (2) whether other coworkers had nicknames used in the workplace (which does not matter if Chekandino did #1) and (3) whether Chekandino complained to HR (if treatment persisted after doing #1). What his wife calls him at home does not matter – home is not the workplace and his supervisor is not his wife. If Chekandino followed the steps above (or the company’s policy for complaints) then he’s right for taking it to the next level, if he did not take the right steps for complaints, then he was merely looking to cash in.
July 31st, 2009 at 7:59 am
I agree, this judge should be removed. It’s the judges that allow these ridiculous people to be given this money for free. I hope this company has an opportunity to appeal.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:12 am
I agree with all above….My question; did the employee ever address to the manager that he felt being called “Dino” insulting or discriminatory?
July 31st, 2009 at 8:16 am
Soory for not sounding very HR but –
This is pure crap!
July 31st, 2009 at 8:23 am
The legal system is pushing discrimination, for whatever reason, to the limits. Within my own company I have seen situations go both ways – with cause & without cause. So far, we have not lost to a frivolous case. But, consider the time, effort and money in defending these matters. Where does it stop?
July 31st, 2009 at 8:42 am
I HAVE to get those quotes for a the $3,000,000 umbrella policy for me!!! It’s just a matter of time before something stupid like this happens to all of us. You know we all are at serous risk for personal law suits also. Between my HR duties and my fiduciary responsibilities regarding our 401k I’m a sitting duck.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:02 am
Only in America…
July 31st, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Marie – they don’t have to appeal yet – they haven’t been found guilty. The judge in this case has determined that there is enough preliminary evidence to hold the matter over for trial by jury.
NJ – you may want to check into an “Employment Practices Liability Insurance” policy. Covers things like discrimination, wrongful termination, etc. Good to have even if your Supervisors are well trained. The deductible may seem a little high, but compared to the cost of the lawyers, etc. to prepare a defense, it can be good protection (always helps to have that Umbrella coverage too).
July 31st, 2009 at 2:43 pm
I think Nisha provided a very good synopsis of concerns with this case.
I know that in most states (if not all) lawyers won’t take a case like this until after the person has filed a complaint with the state civil rights commission and the EEOC. They will investigate and provide a finding whether they feel discrimination did or did not occur. If the finding is that it likely did not occur, the lawyer is not going to take the case unless they are paid up front. If the finding is that it likely did occur, they will take it on contingency and use the investigation by the state and federal government to make their case and possibly encourage an out of court settlement.
In this case, I would expect a lot of Nisha’s concerns were looked into by the state and federal government and they found more going on than what was reported here.
August 5th, 2009 at 8:47 am
NISHA: Excellent points! He will probably get some sort of compensation for this even if it’s just a settlement to make him go away. I just took a webinar last week called: Discrimination Law – What’s new, What’s coming – and it blew me away how volatile and conversation, comment, word, deed whatever can be between Managers and Employees and even Employees and Employees. I mean, it’s almost as if you must walk on eggshells. To me, it was amazing, how many lawsuits grew from complaints that HR Managers, and other Management and Supervisors dismissed as frivolous, not investigated and were actually won. Lots of time and money had to be dumped into them and it’s much harder to investigate when too much time has passed. Bottom line, our legal system has exploded with Discrimination law suits of every kind and EVERY employee complaint MUST be taken seriously and investigated properly to avoid the hot cauldron of Law Suits. My company hasn’t experienced any yet but they gave me a quick reality check because that does not mean that we won’t. I am in the process of recommending training for all of our managers to keep them updated on the latest discrimination laws because a lot of them have been in their positions a long time and some can get comfortable in how they do things and could possibly cost the company money.
September 29th, 2009 at 9:36 am
This really is ridiculous. “Dino” is merely a shortened version of his full name. Lots of “Roberts” are called “Rob”, etc., etc. Dino is simply looking for a big payday.
September 30th, 2009 at 8:29 am
Discrimination law run amuck.
January 17th, 2010 at 2:25 am
I think i know this person who is the victim of this discrimination act; he is highly educated and was a supervisor at that company. The nick name is only one of the 24 point incident happened during his employment. He followed every steps of the procedure. HR, EEOC, etc. The problem is the HR was the owner of the company and is the same person who is creating the hostile work environment. Believe me this case is still going on even though it has been four years of survival. The company apple to motion to dismiss and it was denied. Some people are not just for money like some of you said, there was damaged done and someone need to fix it.
January 18th, 2010 at 8:27 am
What damage JR?
What damage was done?
If I wait too long to ask for vacation time (earned) I get denied and people call me Ed not Edward – my given European name should I sue as well?
January 18th, 2010 at 10:27 am
EDWARD: excellent point. Shows how frivolous the lawsuit is. Not only that, it sounds to me like Dino is Micro-Nit-Picking. He may not like his job or the people he works with and maybe this is his way to get back at them
January 18th, 2010 at 11:02 am
Edward, do you have a problem wih people calling you Ed as opposed to Edward? If so, then you should make any applicable (supervisor, co-workers) aware of your preference. If it persists, inform HR, etc. The correct grievance procedure should be followed in any case. Vacation is not the same as refusing to call someone by his/her name. The latter is disrespectful, lazy and unprofessional. Further, it shows complete disregard for diversity. No one on the outside can dismiss this as being frivolous as we are provided with so little information. JR pointed out that there was other stuff occuring. Seems like more people need to take something like this (which seems ridiculous to many of you) more seriously or you will cost your organizations a lot of money. Just because you are not personally offended, does not make it negligible.