Does single, odious racial slur a lawsuit make?

The question in the headline is one that eludes a common answer in courts in differing parts of the country. Here in Texas, the answer is “no,” but the times may be changing.

Racial epithet scrawled in elevator

Robert Collier worked as an operating room aide in a Dallas hospital. He claimed the elevator he needed to take every day to reach the hospital cafeteria had a single, abhorrent racial slur scrawled in it.

Collier, who is black, claimed he complained to management. After about six months, he said the epithet was removed, although he believed it was cleaned up by another black employee who found it highly offense and not by hospital management.

Collier sued claiming a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (He also claimed two swastikas were painted on the walls of an employee area and that coworkers called him “boy.”)

No hostile work environment found

The trial court tossed the claim, and the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals (the federal appeals court covering Texas) agreed. Why? The rationale was:

• Collier didn’t find the epithet to be physically threatening;
• The slur wasn’t directed at him; and
• The epithet (or the swastikas or the “boy” comments) didn’t unreasonably interfere with his work performance.

In short, as long as the punch list gets checked, then a single word—no matter how vile or offensive—can never be sufficient evidence to support an unlawful hostile environment claim.

Case closed?