Plaintiff Bruce Modicue sued defendant Southwestern Bell Telephone Company in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri raising claims of discrimination based on religion, race, and disability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Before the court is Defendant Southwestern Bell Telephone Company’s motion for summary judgment.
Statement of Undisputed Facts
Modicue worked at Southwestern Bell’s call center in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, as a Leveraged Service Representative. In June 2020, the company implemented a face covering policy in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Modicue requested a religious accommodation to be exempt from wearing a face covering, citing a Bible verse. The company offered him paid vacation or unpaid excused leave as accommodations, which Modicue accepted.
In August 2020, Modicue submitted a request for accommodation based on anxiety triggered by wearing a mask. The company and union later negotiated an agreement for a work-from-home option, which was offered to Modicue in December 2020. Modicue initially refused to come to the office briefly to set up his equipment but eventually began working from home in February 2021. However, he was chronically absent and failed to perform work duties for several weeks in March and April 2021. After Modicue refused to attend multiple scheduled meetings to discuss his work status, his employment was terminated on April 19, 2021.
There were some evidentiary disputes regarding the medical documentation of Modicue’s claimed disability. The court noted inconsistencies in the forms filled out by Modicue’s physician, Dr. Wong, regarding whether Modicue had a physical or mental impairment that substantially limited major life activities.
Legal Analysis
Religious Discrimination: The court found that Modicue failed to show he was disciplined for refusing to wear a mask due to his religious beliefs. Instead, the company accommodated him with approved time off and later offered a work-from-home option. The court concluded that the company engaged in an interactive dialogue and offered reasonable accommodations.
Disability Discrimination: The court questioned whether Modicue could prove he had a disability as defined by the ADA, given the contradictory medical documentation. However, the court found that even if Modicue had a disability, he failed to show he was qualified to perform the essential functions of his job due to his excessive absences. The court also determined that Modicue did not demonstrate that his termination was because of his disability, as it was due to his failure to work and attend required meetings.
Race Discrimination: The court concluded that Modicue failed to provide facts giving rise to an inference of unlawful race discrimination. Modicue did not show that similarly situated employees of a different race were treated more favorably. The evidence presented by Modicue regarding other employees was found to be vague and insufficient.
The court granted summary judgment in favor of Southwestern Bell Telephone Company on all of Modicue’s discrimination claims.
Schrag on Law 