• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

HRMorning

  • FREE RESOURCES
  • PREMIUM CONTENT
  • HR DEEP DIVES
  • PODCASTS
    • VOICES OF HR
    • WOMEN’S LEADERSHIP TODAY
  • LOGIN
  • SIGN UP FREE
  • Employment Law
  • Benefits
  • Recruiting
  • HR Technology
  • Payroll
  • Management
  • Women’s Leadership
  • More
    • Talent Management
    • Performance Management
    • Leadership & Strategy
    • Compensation
    • Policy & Procedures
    • Wellness
    • Staff Departure
    • HR Career & Self-Care
    • Health Care
    • Retirement Plans
  • Employment Law

FedEx gets hit with $366 million verdict in race retaliation suit

Tom D'Agostino
By: Tom D'Agostino
  • Share on

About the Author

Tom D’Agostino is an attorney and legal editor who has more than 30 years of experience writing about employment law, disability law and education law trends. He earned his B.A. degree from Ramapo College of New Jersey and his J.D. from the Duquesne University School of Law. D’Agostino, who is a member of the Pennsylvania bar, is a past member of the American Bar Association’s Section of Individual Rights and Responsibilities and the Pennsylvania Bar Association’s Legal Services to Persons with Disabilities Committee. He has provided technical assistance in the production of segments for television’s ABC World News and 20/20, and he has been quoted in periodicals including USA Today. He is also a past contributing author of Legal Rights of Persons with Disabilities: An Analysis of Federal Law, which is a comprehensive two-volume treatise addressing the legal rights of people with disabilities. Tom is passionate about baseball and authentic Italian food. When not writing, he enjoys spending time with family.

Show Less
Last Updated: November 3, 2022
3 minute engagement
Jury Finds For Ex-Employee

A Texas jury has returned a verdict of more than $366 million to a former FedEx employee who said the package delivery giant engaged in retaliation because she complained about alleged racial discrimination. The award, which may be negated or reduced on appeal, includes $365 million in punitive damages.

Jennifer Harris alleged in her lawsuit that she was hired by FedEx as an entry-level inside sales representative in 2007.

She rose through the ranks, receiving six promotions and eventually rising to the rank of district sales manager. Her sales team was one of FedEx’s best, she alleged.

Things changed in March of 2019, she said, when a white supervisor asked her to accept a demotion. When Harris balked at the request, negative treatment of her escalated and her supervisor took away commissions that she earned, Harris alleged.

When she complained to HR of alleged discrimination, Harris added, FedEx responded by telling her that her job performance was subpar and then terminating her employment in January of 2020 after a “sham investigation.”

A white HR advisor allegedly said, “Just go on with your job, it’ll all blow over.”

In her suit, Harris said that “FedEx hires HR personnel who are not qualified to follow policies prohibiting discrimination and retaliation laws.” It does not adequately train and supervise its managers to make sure those policies are followed, she alleged.

Suit alleges retaliation

That shortcoming led to discrimination and retaliation against Harris, the suit asserted.

For more than a year, FedEx subjected Harris to harassment that was “constant, obscene, obnoxious, [and] shocking to the conscience of the ordinary person,” it added.

The suit alleged a violation of Section 1981, which guarantees an equal right to make and enforce contracts, including contracts of employment. The law also gives people the right to recover damages for retaliation, the suit said.

It requested declaratory relief, equitable relief, and damages including punitive damages.

After a jury trial ended and before the jury deliberated, the trial court judge issued the jury its instructions for deliberation.

Instructions: Here’s what to do

Those instructions noted the substance of Harris’ claims while also summarizing FedEx’s position: that Harris was let go due to subpar job performance. They also indicate that Harris further asserted a violation of Title VII.

To prove unlawful discrimination, the instructions advised, Harris had to show that she would not have been terminated but for her race. To win, she did not have to show that unlawful discrimination was the only reason for the decision to terminate her employment, they added.

To win on her retaliation claim, the court instructed, Harris had to show three things.

First, she had to prove that she engaged in protected activity (which was complaining about alleged discrimination). Second, she had to show that FedEx in fact terminated her employment. And third, she had to prove that she would not have been terminated if she did not engage in the protected activity.

As to damages, it explained that compensatory damages are awarded “to make the plaintiff whole,” while punitive damages are appropriate upon a finding of malice or reckless indifference.

Jury returns verdict

When the jury returned the verdict form, it answered “No” to the question of whether Harris sufficiently proved that FedEx would not have terminated her but for her race. In other words, it found for FedEx on the discrimination allegation.

However, it found for Harris on the retaliation allegation. It said FedEx would not have retaliated against her but for her claim of racial bias.

It then proceeded to award $170,000 for past pain and suffering as well as $1,040,000 for future pain and suffering.

The biggest blow came last, when the jury tacked on $365 million in punitive damages.

FedEx has already indicated its intent to appeal.

Filed under
  • Employment Law
  • Share on

Get the HRMorning Newsletter

With HRMorning arriving in your inbox, you will never miss critical stories on labor laws, benefits, retention and onboarding strategies.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form

Free Training & Resources

White Papers

Reducing Employee Inpatient Readmissions with Coordinated Care Management:

Provided by Conifer Health

White Papers

Maven’s State of Women’s and Family Health Benefits — 2025 Report

Provided by Maven Clinic

White Papers

Orlandi Case Study

Provided by Paypro

White Papers

Unconventional Benefits: An Employer’s Guide

Provided by Paycom

SPONSORED CONTENT

HR Technology

sponsored content
The Best AI Software for HR Automation

Courtesy of G-P

Talent Management

sponsored content
Powerful Employee Retention Strategies for 2025: How to Keep Your Best People

Courtesy of PEOPLEGURU

Benefits

Health Care

Wellness

sponsored content
Proven Results: 5 Ways Teladoc Health Chronic Condition Management Transforms HR Outcomes

Courtesy of TELADOC HEALTH

Further Reading

  • Employment Law
EEOC Race Bias Suit Settles for $8.7 Million

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has secured an $8.7 million settlement in a case that alleged unlawful race discriminati...

  • Employment Law
New OSHA Fine: $202K for Recycling Plant’s Repeat Violations

A recycling plant in Wisconsin faces more than $202,000 in penalties after OSHA found repeat violations at a follow-up inspection. The c...

  • Employment Law
Porn at Work: Was Worker Fired for Complaining About It?

How much porn at work is OK to watch? We hope your policy is zero.  And as this lawsuit shows, the reasons for taking that policy s...

  • Employment Law
8 Bully Types That Disrupt Workplace Culture

Workplace bullying has long been a challenge, but during Mental Health Awareness Month, it’s especially important to highlight how such b...

  • Employment Law
Was Safety Training Adequate? Worker Gets Hurt While Using Ladder

A federal court in Texas addressed safety training claims raised by a Home Depot worker who was injured while using a ladder to retrieve a ...

  • Employment Law
Equal pay dispute: Out-of-state remote employee wins first round in court

Scoring a significant preliminary victory, an out-of-state remote employee who lives and works in New Hampshire will be allowed to pursue p...

Get the latest from HRMorning in your inbox PLUS immediately access 10 FREE HR guides.

I WANT MY FREE GUIDES
HR Morning Logo
  • Facebook
  • Linked In
  • ABOUT HRMORNING
  • ADVERTISE WITH US
  • WRITE FOR US
  • CONTACT
  • Employment Law
  • Benefits
  • Recruiting
  • Talent Management
  • Performance Management
  • HR Technology
  • Leadership & Strategy
  • Compensation
  • Policy & Procedures
  • Wellness
  • Staff Departure
  • HR Career & Self-Care
  • Health Care
  • Retirement Plans
  • DEI

HRMorning, part of the Rover Insights Network, provides the latest HR and employment law news for HR professionals in the trenches of small-to-medium-sized businesses. Rather than simply regurgitating the day's headlines, HRMorning delivers actionable insights, helping HR execs understand what HR trends mean to their business.

Powered By Rover Insights
Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
Copyright© 2026 Rover Insights
HRMorning Logo

WELCOME BACK!

Enter your username and password below to log in

Forget Your Username or Password?

Reset Password

Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.

Log In

Why do we need your credit card for a free trial?

We ask for your credit card to allow your subscription to continue should you decide to keep your membership beyond the free trial period.  This prevents any interruption of content access.

Your card will not be charged at any point during your 21 day free trial
and you may cancel at any time during your free trial.

During your free trial, you can cancel at any time with a single click on your “Account” page.  It’s that easy.