Home » Blog » Employment Discrimination » Discrimination, Hostile Work Environment, Retaliation Claims Properly Dismissed as Time-Barred and Other Reasons

Discrimination, Hostile Work Environment, Retaliation Claims Properly Dismissed as Time-Barred and Other Reasons

by mjpospis on December 3, 2017

in Employment Discrimination, Employment Law, Failure to Promote, Hostile Work Environment, Retaliation, Statute of Limitations

In Antrobus v. New York City Department of Sanitation, 16-3490-cv, 2017 WL 5952699 (2d Cir. Dec. 1, 2017) (Summary Order), the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff’s discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation claims.

As to plaintiff’s hostile work environment claim, the court explained:

With regard to hostile work environment, Antrobus asserted that egregious verbal incidents took place, but they occurred several years beyond the limitations period. Accordingly, those verbal incidents cannot independently support a claim. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–5(e)(1). Antrobus did not offer any evidence indicating that the conduct that took place within the limitations period either was motivated by his protected characteristics, or was sufficiently related to the earlier verbal incidents to constitute a continuing violation.

Plaintiff’s discrimination claim failed because the verbal incidents were beyond the applicable limitations period. In addition, “with regard to [plaintiff]’s assertion that he was treated improperly when he was required to work holidays, the record indicates that other employees also worked those holidays” such that plaintiff “failed to demonstrate that similarly-situated employees received better treatment.”

As to his retaliation claim, apparently based on the employer’s denial of leave requests, the court noted that the denial of leave “was the product of an ongoing effort by his employer to curtail his improperly documented absences” and that plaintiff “did not submit evidence indicating that retaliation was ‘a substantial reason’ in denying his request.”

Finally, the court held that summary judgment was appropriate on plaintiff’s failure-to-promote claim, where plaintiff “admitted that many individuals have remained in his same position for over 30 years, and that he has never applied for a promotion.”

Categories: Employment Discrimination, Employment Law, Failure to Promote, Hostile Work Environment, Retaliation, Statute of Limitations

Tags: , , , , , ,

Previous post:

Next post: