New Yorkers have various legal tools available to them when it comes to pursuing justice for discrimination. Statewide, workers have federal law (Title VII) and state law (the New York State Human Rights Law). In New York City, workers have those plus the New York City Human Rights Law. An experienced New York employment discrimination lawyer can help you assess your situation, determine which laws apply to your circumstance, and select the best legal avenue for setting you on a path to success.
The difference between the NYSHRL and Title VII was on display in a recent religious discrimination case from Nassau County.
In 2015, M.C. unsuccessfully applied for a senior engineer position at a Long Island-based healthcare network. A year later, the engineer successfully interviewed with the same company -- this time landing a job as a “manager of network operations.”
M.C., as a practicing Muslim, had specific religious observations that occurred during the business day. The manager’s supervisor asked him to mark his calendar with the times of his daily prayers. The manager alleged that he did so, while the employer claimed he did not. Subsequently, the manager’s supervisor scheduled no fewer than five meetings during M.C.’s prayer times, according to his lawsuit, forcing him to miss some of his daily prayer obligations.
Another point of dispute centered around comments allegedly made by another supervisory employee. That man, D.B., allegedly asked the man who hired M.C. why he chose to “hire this Muslim guy,” while stating his dislike for the “Muslim guy,” M.C. The man also allegedly commented to M.C. that people from M.C.’s background were not always as smart as M.C. or as easy to work with. He also made fun of one worker’s ethnic names, according to M.C.
The employer fired M.C. in September 2022. Afterward, M.C. sued on the basis of religious, ethnic, and national origin discrimination. The employee advanced claims under both federal and state law.
The court’s decision addressing the employer’s motion for summary judgment shows why this was wise. The evidence M.C. put forward was not enough to qualify as “severe” or “pervasive” discrimination, which is the standard that federal law demands. D.B.’s comments plus the scheduling of the meetings were not forms of severe discrimination, and they were insufficient to “allow a reasonable jury to find that plaintiff’s work environment was permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult.”
However, as the court noted, M.C.’s NYSHRL claim was a different story. New York State amended the NYSHRL in 2019 to lower the standard that state law required. Before the 2019 amendment, courts construed the NYSHRL as requiring proof of severe or pervasive discrimination... roughly the same standard as Title VII requires. After the state amended the law in 2019, the NYSHRL imposed only a lower standard that approximately mirrored that of the NYCHRL. (The NYCHRL says that a worker merely must demonstrate “that he was treated less well, at least in part for a discriminatory reason.”)
M.C.’s allegations -- the missed prayers due to scheduling conflicts, the offensive comments by D.B., and the negative performance reviews and internal discipline M.C. endured -- were adequate to raise a question about whether the manager was treated less well and whether discriminatory bias motivated that treatment.
New York continues to be a leader in protecting workers and allowing them to get justice after they endured workplace discrimination or harassment. Statutes like the NYSHRL and the NYCHRL are potent tools in the arsenal of a worker seeking a civil judgment. The experienced New York City religious discrimination attorneys at Phillips & Associates PLLC are here to help. Our team of knowledgeable and zealous attorneys is here and ready to help you in your fight. To find out more, contact us online or at (866) 229-9441 to set up a free and confidential consultation today.