Plaintiff Leroy Johnson sued defendant Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies Corporation (Wabtec) in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri, raising claims of wrongful termination in violation of the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1965, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Wabtec, and Johnson appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
Factual Overview
Leroy Johnson worked as a supervisor at Wabtec’s Independence plant. In August 2020, Johnson and his daughters, who also worked at the plant, learned that their cousin had tested positive for COVID-19. Johnson and his daughters did not immediately disclose this information to their supervisors or HR, as required by Wabtec’s COVID-19 protocols. As a result, Wabtec issued a Last Chance Agreement to Johnson and his daughters, which they signed.
In August 2021, Johnson’s daughter Shelia tested positive for COVID-19. Johnson had been in contact with her but did not fully disclose the extent of their interactions during the HR investigation. Wabtec terminated Johnson for violating the Last Chance Agreement by failing to disclose his contacts with a COVID-positive individual. Johnson, who was about 66 years old at the time of termination, refused a severance payment offered by Wabtec and sued for wrongful termination.
Legal Analysis
Discrimination Claims under Title VII and MHRA: The court analyzed Johnson’s claims under the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework because he did not present direct evidence of discrimination. To establish a prima facie case, Johnson had to show that he was a member of a protected class, met his employer’s legitimate expectations, suffered an adverse employment action, and that the circumstances gave rise to an inference of discrimination.
The court found that Johnson almost repudiated his claims of discrimination during his testimony. Johnson argued that Wabtec treated similarly situated white employees more favorably, but the court determined that the employees he identified were not similarly situated because they were not terminated for misconduct like Johnson. The court also found that Johnson failed to provide evidence that Wabtec fabricated a reason to terminate him, as he had violated the Last Chance Agreement by not being fully candid about his potential exposure to COVID-19.
ADEA Claim: The court did not address the merits of Johnson’s ADEA claim because he waived it on appeal by failing to argue the merits in his opening brief.
Conclusion
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court granting summary judgment in favor of Wabtec on Johnson’s MHRA, Title VII, and ADEA claims.
Schrag on Law 