Dedewo v. CBS Corporation

Background

Deborah Dedewo, an African American woman, worked for CBS Corporation. She brought claims under Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. She alleged that CBS discriminated against her because of her race and gender by disciplining and terminating her when white male employees allegedly were not disciplined for similar conduct. She also alleged that her termination retaliated against her for reporting discrimination through CBS’s internal complaint system. Dedewo withdrew her separate failure-to-promote claim.

Dedewo planned a trip to Europe after using nearly all of her available vacation time. She asked for unpaid time off, but her manager, Edward Coleman, and a human-resources vice president told her several times that the request was denied and that she was expected to work. Dedewo traveled anyway, switched some work shifts, called out sick for one shift, and arrived about three hours late for another shift. The opinion states that she did not notify supervisors of the delay, initially gave one explanation for being late, and later gave another. CBS issued her an attendance warning.

After receiving the warning, Dedewo complained through CBS’s internal complaint system, characterizing the warning as discriminatory. During the resulting investigation, she initially denied taking the European trip but later admitted that she had taken a modified trip and asked the investigator not to tell Coleman. CBS terminated her employment on October 5, 2015. Dedewo identified two white male coworkers, Ross Wetoskey and Robert Collins, as comparators. She also argued that CBS converted her warning into a termination after she complained.

Legal standard

The court applied the summary-judgment standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. Summary judgment is appropriate when the evidence presents no genuine dispute about a fact that could affect the outcome and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In an employment-discrimination case, the employee must provide evidence from which a reasonable jury could find that unlawful discrimination was the real reason for the challenged action, rather than merely relying on conclusory allegations.

For the retaliation theory, Dedewo had to provide evidence of protected activity, CBS’s awareness of that activity, a materially adverse action, and a causal connection between the complaint and the termination.

Court’s analysis

The court held that Dedewo did not provide sufficient evidence of discriminatory discharge. An employee may support an inference of discrimination by showing that a similarly situated employee outside the protected group received better treatment. The court explained that comparators must be subject to the same standards and must have engaged in conduct with closely similar circumstances and seriousness.

The court found that Wetoskey was not a valid comparator because he notified Coleman in advance that he would be late, allowing CBS to cover his shift, while Dedewo did not provide advance notice or promptly respond to supervisors. The court also found no evidence that Wetoskey had lied about why he was late. Collins was not a valid comparator because his alleged sick calls occurred at the end of vacations, while Dedewo’s absence was planned after her leave request had been denied and was connected to an unauthorized trip. The court concluded that Dedewo’s conduct was more serious than the conduct attributed to either coworker. It also found no other evidence allowing a reasonable juror to conclude that racial or gender-based bias was more likely than not the reason for her termination.

The court separately rejected the retaliation claim. Although Dedewo’s termination followed her internal complaint by about a week, the court held that the basis for the termination existed before the complaint. The court also found that information learned during the complaint investigation—specifically, Dedewo’s additional statements about the trip and her request that the information be withheld from Coleman—was intervening misconduct that broke the claimed causal connection. The court concluded that her conduct, rather than retaliation, caused the termination.

Disposition

The court granted CBS’s motion for summary judgment and entered judgment in CBS’s favor with costs. The court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Dedewo’s New York State and New York City claims after resolving the federal claims. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion, mark the case closed, and enter judgment.