Do I have a legal case to sue them?

Question

I am a over 40 male from a minority group. I was the only male in a department of less than 20 women (There was a strong anti male "Men are idiots" bias in general). I was placed in a position where I felt pressured to resign due to changes towards me and my work at an organization in the South. When I first got hired, I was told initially that I was a full time salaried employee (I signed an agreement to this effect). 11 months after this, I was told I was an hourly employee and that my conversion to be a salaried employee did not occur. I expressed my disappointment in this and said that I will clock in (as requested) for a month until they get the paperwork straightened out. Before the month is over, I'm hauled into my bosses office, told that I violated some Internet usage policy and that I will be terminated. Then, at this meeting, I was told that I would be terminated or I could resign. I then, with less than 15 minutes to think about this resigned.

Do I have a case?

Answer 1

For all intents and purposes you were fired. There is no meaningful difference between resigning when you were told that termination was the only alternative, and in fact being terminated. Moreover, you are implying that you were wrongfully fired for a discriminatory reason and not because you violated the internet usage policy. Here is how the analysis goes:

If you are a member of a protected class (for example, male), were meeting the reasonable expectations of your employer, suffered an adverse action (for example, forced to resign) under circustances that allows a connection between your protected status and the adverse action, you have made out what is known as a "prima facie" (read PRY-muh FASH-uh) case of employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. For the purpose of the prima facie case there does not have to be any huge connection between protected status and adverse action. Your status as the only male in the department and the anti-male "men are idiots" talk around the office (particularly if engaged in by the decision maker) may be sufficient to connect your sex and your termination. If you have been replace by a female, that too may suffice to draw a connection.

It then falls to your employer to articulate a non-discriminatory reason for your termination. Here, they articulated that you were forced to resign because you violated the internet usage policy.

The ball now bounces back to you to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that this reason is false and that you were really fired because you are male. This can be done in a variety of ways. The first thing I want to know is how you allegedly violated the internet usage policy, and how your employer found out.

If, for example, a co-worker observed you looking at pictures of scantily clad women licking each others toes, reported you to HR, which conducted an investigation and discovered that you had in fact been viewing this material in violation of your employer's internet policy, I think you would have a very difficult time proving that you were fired for a reason other than a violation of the internet usage policy. However, if your boss went on line one night after returning from a girls only pub crawl, looked at your internet usage (and no one else's), and fired you for the 10 minutes you spend every morning checking sports scores at ESPN while ignoring your female counterparts who read TMZ for 30 minutes or more every day while at work, you are well on your way to discrediting your employer's alleged non-discriminatory reason. Whatever the particulars of your case, if you prove that the internet usage story is a ruse, the fact finder (whether judge or jury) may infer that you were the subject of unlawful discrimination.

You will also have to overcome the presumption that an employer who hires you knowing you are male will not fire you because you are male. Were you forced to resign by someone other than the person who selected you? That may be significant. Did the employer hire you because there was not a suitable female candidate to do your job, and fire you once they found one?

These are the key things you look at in determining whether you can establish discrimination. You will also want to be very specific about who expressed anti-male animus and when. If it was primarily co-workers who did this while your boss was in her office, this will be less persuasive than if your boss made a lot of anti-male comments herself. Get out a calendar and start trying to recall incidents now. Your memory will not get any better.

Also, you seem to be alleging three possible discriminatory motives: age, sex and race. It is possible that all played a role. However, be wary of alleging potential bases for discrimination if you do not really believe they apply.

As for the salary versus hourly issue, your employer was likely only attempting to comport with the law. Your duties and the law mandate how you should be paid, not employer choice. "Salary" is usually just employer-speak for "don't have to pay overtime." If the hourly rate did not come out to be as much as your salary, it was probably so they would have some in reserve to pay overtime when absolutely necessary.

If you believe that you were discriminated against you should file a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

Answer 2

If you were fired specifically over abuse of internet usage policy, and they have proof that you did in fact abuse that policy, then nothing else matters in your story. They have a policy and proof that you violated it.

Do you hav any proof of any of what you claim? Do you have other workers that will back you up? Any documentation? Records?

You're best bet is to go to a lawyer that offers free consultations and see what they suggest. Since they get paid out of any settltment you would collect, if they think you have a case they will take you on as a client. And if they won't take you on, you have not got a chance.

Answer 3

Doesn't sound like it. Take your documentation to a lawyer and double check, but I don't see anything.

1. most employees are at-will employees and can be terminated for any reason at any time
2. you just can't be fired for being part of a suspect class
-they gave another reason here
3. I don't see where you think a possible claim has arisen...

Answer 4

According to Law, when a person does an act under coercion,threat or undue influence, such an act does not bind him.
You resigned under coercion,threat and undue influence and you do have a strong, strong case against your employer !

Answer 5

Only an attorney can provide you real legal advise. I suggest that you contact one.