Accessibility Tools

Skip to main content

Employer Confronted with Worker "Taking A Knee"

Written on .

The controversial subject of professional football players "taking a knee" during the National Anthem has now expanded to the workplace.  In a recent case, an employer was confronted with an African-American employee protesting his employer's alleged racial mistreatment by taking a knee during a meeting.  A supervisor asked the plaintiff to step into his office following the kneeling incident.  The discussion in the supervisor's office "escalated" when the supervisor issued the plaintiff an  "official discussion," and the supervisor felt threatened and asked the plaintiff to leave, and local police were called when the plaintiff refused to leave.  The plaintiff was placed on leave without pay pending an investigation.

A federal district court in Arkansas found that the plaintiff had established a prima facia retaliation claim under Title VII, but failed to show the employer's explanation for its adverse employment action was a pretext.  While the judge found that the plaintiff's taking a knee was protected activity under Title VII, the court granted summary judgment on the plaintiff's hostile environment and race and age discrimination claims.  The plaintiff did not show circumstances indicating discriminatory disparate treatment, and the supervisor's alleged support of Donald Trump's comments about black people and bashing of Hillary Clinton and NFL National Anthem protestors was not enough to show pretext.  

Editor's Note: The case is Raynor v. Brennan, 2020 BL 326860 (E.D. Ark., 8/27/20.  This case is illustrative of situations in which an employee may engage in protected conduct and unprotected conduct at the same time.  In such situations, the employer must discipline an employee only for the unprotected conduct, as discipline for a protected conduct, like kneeling in the present situation, might be considered retaliation prohibited by the employment laws.  Obviously, a suspension pending investigation is a wise choice in such circumstances, giving the employer the opportunity to seek the counsel of competent labor and employment attorneys.

Related Content

Get Email Updates

Receive newsletters and alerts directly in your email inbox. Sign up below.

Recent Content

stamp, desk table
In a first for at least the last decade or so, the EEOC has brought a discrimination claim alleging the New York Times promotion practices…
letter
Suppose a former employee following termination makes threatening, harassing, defamatory or otherwise inappropriate statements or violates…
changing leaf
On August 17, James Macy became the third GOP-appointed member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), giving the NLRB three members…
glasses, beach, horizon
On August 26, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) addressed employee wellness programs that permit fees on workers’ health premiums fo…
infant, child, mother
Federal judges have now ruled in over a dozen cases involving the 2022 Providing Urgent Maternal Protections for Nursing Mothers Act, commo…
tipping over pawn
As a new enforcement approach, ICE has done away with an I-9 enforcement practice giving employers a period of time to correct minor or tec…