CHARLESTON — The West Virginia Intermediate Court of Appeals upheld a summary judgment ruling in a racial discrimination and hostile work environment case.
Jaymes Faulk appealed a Cabell Circuit Court order granting summary judgment in his racial discrimination and hostile work environment case against Mildred Mitchell-Bateman Hospital, according to a Nov. 1 memorandum decision before the West Virginia Intermediate Court of Appeals.
Attorneys for both parties declined to comment on the litigation.
Faulk, a Certified Nursing Assistant employed through a staffing agency, Aureus Nursing, worked at the psychiatric facility in Huntington. The hospital, operated by the Department of Health and Human Resources, employed both full-time workers and those contracted through agencies.
Faulk's paychecks came from Aureus Nursing, and his contract was renewed multiple times during his 13-month tenure. Throughout his employment, Faulk faced several investigations by Adult Protective Services, with allegations including policy violations, inappropriate behavior, threats to patients and accusations of physical abuse.
Faulks was suspended five times, resulting in 112 days of missed work. In March 2018, a patient accused "a black guy named James" of rape, leading to Faulk's removal from the work schedule pending investigation. The allegation was later found unsubstantiated.
Despite this, on March 27, 2018, Faulk's contract was terminated by the hospital's executives, citing prior investigations as the reason.
In September 2018, Faulk filed a complaint against the hospital, alleging wrongful discharge based on racial discrimination, a hostile work environment and intentional infliction of emotional distress. During a deposition, Faulk admitted no indication of racial motivation for his termination and acknowledged his status as a contract worker exempt from the hospital's progressive disciplinary policy.
The hospital moved for summary judgment in December 2020, arguing termination was based on misconduct investigations, not racial bias. Faulk responded in August 2022, and a hearing took place on Sept. 1, 2022.
The circuit court granted summary judgment on Sept. 28, 2022, stating Faulk failed to satisfy the discrimination test and provided no evidence supporting his claims.
On appeal, Faulk argued the court erred in finding no prima facie case for race discrimination and a hostile work environment.
The court established that a plaintiff must show membership in a protected class, an adverse decision and that the decision wouldn't have occurred but for the plaintiff's protected status. The court found Faulk failed to establish racial motivation, and even if he did, the hospital provided a non-discriminatory reason for termination – multiple misconduct allegations.
The court also rejected Faulk's hostile work environment claim, as he couldn't prove unwelcome conduct based on ancestry that altered working conditions.
The appellate court affirmed the circuit court's decision, stating Faulk didn't demonstrate racial motivation for termination and failed to prove a hostile work environment.
"Mr. Faulk admitted in a deposition that he was not called derogatory names by his fellow employees or supervisors, he never felt that he was given assignments based on his race, and he never felt excluded or discriminated against prior to the rape allegation and his termination," the memorandum decision states. "Further, he did not allege any continuous behavior that was severe enough to alter the conditions of his work environment or create an abusive environment."
Faulk's admission during the deposition, lack of continuous severe behavior, and inability to link alleged discrimination to his termination led to the rejection of his claims. The circuit court's order granting summary judgment to the hospital on Sept. 28, 2022, was upheld.
