Gratton V. United Parcel Service Inc.
Case Background
On October 18, 2022, Plaintiff Tahvio Gratton filed a Racial Discrimination lawsuit in the District Court of Washington Eastern at Yakima (Case number: 1:22cv3149). Judge Thomas O. Rice presided over the case.
Cause
Tahvio Gratton, an African American man, worked as a Cover Driver and Delivery Driver for United Parcel Service (UPS) in Yakima, Washington, from September 2016 to October 2021. From the start of his employment at the Yakima UPS center in January 2018, Gratton experienced racial discrimination and unfair treatment from managers. On-Road Supervisor Matt Fromherz and Center Manager Erik Loomis often gave Gratton fewer work opportunities compared to white drivers. They frequently laid him off when work was available, creating a hostile work environment. In February 2018, Fromherz denied Gratton a route without justification, stating that Gratton “didn’t come and ask me like a man,” an example of disparate treatment.
In April 2018, during a ride-along, Supervisor Sam O’Rourke repeatedly called Gratton “boy” and used other demeaning language, despite Gratton’s objections to the racist terminology. O’Rourke continued this behavior, even in front of customers. When Gratton reported the incident to Center Manager Loomis, Loomis dismissed his concerns, saying, “That’s just how he talks,” further contributing to the hostile work environment.
UPS managers retaliated against Gratton for filing complaints about discriminatory treatment. They assigned him to an undesirable “mall route,” purposely overloaded his deliveries, and criticized him for taking too long to complete the extended route. Managers singled out Gratton for scrutiny over minor issues, such as visible tattoos and clothing choices, while not applying the same standards to white employees—another instance of disparate treatment.
Injuries
He experienced severe emotional distress, humiliation, and anxiety due to the hostile work environment. The constant scrutiny, false accusations of poor performance, and public shaming caused Gratton profound mental anguish and damaged his professional reputation.
Damages
As a result of UPS’s discriminatory and retaliatory actions, Gratton suffered significant financial losses from being improperly denied work assignments and pay, leading to wage violations. Gratton also suffered additional financial damages from lost wages and benefits when UPS unlawfully terminated his employment in October 2021. This wrongful termination further harmed his career prospects and earning potential in the delivery and logistics industry.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal representation
- Plaintiff(s): Tahvio Gratton
- Counsel for Plaintiff: Drew F. Teti| Dustin L. Collier | Elizabeth R. Malay | Jordan A. Taren | Richard E. Goldsworthy | Robin J. Shishido
- Defendant(s):United Parcel Service Inc., an Ohio Corporation
- Counsel for Defendants: Elizabeth A. Falcone| Florence Z. Mao | Kimberly A. Holdiman |Michael D. Mitchell, Esq
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
The verdict, rendered Thursday in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Washington at Yakima, may be both the biggest of its kind and the biggest ever in the state, said attorney Dustin Collier, one of the lawyers who represented plaintiff Tahvio Gratton.
“We thank the jury for seeing the truth, vindicating our client’s rights, and sending a powerful message to UPS that our communities will not tolerate racial discrimination, harassment, or retaliation against the victims of discrimination and harassment,” the attorney said.
Claims
Gratton alleges that UPS violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD), 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and Washington public policy through the following actions:
- Racial Discrimination: UPS discriminated against Gratton based on his race in work assignments, route allocation, disciplinary actions, and ultimately termination. The company consistently favored white employees over Gratton and other Black drivers when scheduling and allocating work opportunities.
- Hostile Work Environment: UPS managers, including Fromherz, Loomis, and O’Rourke, created and maintained a racially hostile work environment through racist language, unfair scrutiny of Black employees, and disparate treatment.
- Retaliation: When Gratton opposed discriminatory practices and filed complaints, UPS retaliated by restricting his work assignments further. They subjected him to increased scrutiny and fabricated performance issues. Ultimately, they terminated his employment.
- Wrongful Termination: UPS unlawfully terminated Gratton because of his race and in retaliation for his protected activities of opposing discrimination and assisting other employees with complaints.
- Wage Violations: UPS failed to properly compensate Gratton for forced layoffs and manipulated his work schedule to deny him rightful pay and benefits.
Defense
United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS), denied most of the allegations made by the Plaintiff, Tahvio Gratton. UPS admitted that Gratton had been employed as a Package Car Driver from September 2016 to October 2021. However, UPS denied engaging in discriminatory or retaliatory actions against Gratton.
The company asserted that all actions regarding Gratton’s employment were for legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons based on reasonable business judgment. UPS denied mistreating Gratton or treating him less favorably than other employees. It acknowledged that Gratton filed grievances through his union but maintained these were based on alleged violations of the collective bargaining agreement, not discrimination or retaliation.
UPS denied creating a hostile work environment or failing to prevent harassment. The company stated that it terminated Gratton’s employment on October 27, 2021. However, they refuted that this was for any unlawful reason, challenging the claims of pretextual termination. UPS raised several affirmative defenses, including failure to state a claim, statute of limitations, failure to mitigate damages, and preemption by federal labor law.
The company requested that the Court dismiss Gratton’s complaint in its entirety and deny all claims and demands for relief.
Jury Verdict
On September 12, 2024, the jury $39.6 million for emotional distress, along with $198 million in punitive damages to the Plaintiff.
Court Documents:
Available Upon Request
Press Release:
Leave A Comment