• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Tyson Discrimation case and Tyson Propaganda

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
Supreme Court boots Tyson racial case back to appeals court

By GINA HOLLAND/Lincoln Journal Star

February 22, 2006



WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court stepped into a dispute Tuesday over whether white managers can be sued for calling black employees “boys.”



The court unanimously overturned an appeals court decision that said use of the term “boy” alone was not evidence of workplace discrimination and ordered the appeals court to reconsider the matter.



The decision, one of the first actions in which new Justice Samuel Alito participated, is a loss for Tyson Foods Inc. which was sued by two longtime black employees who claimed they were passed over for promotions by a white manager who called them “boys.”



A jury awarded Anthony Ash and John Hithon $1.75 million apiece in damages, but a judge threw out the decision.



Ash had 15 years of experience with Tyson Foods and Hithon 13 years. A white man who got a management job they sought at an Alabama plant had less than two years experience.



Eric Schnapper, a law professor at the University of Washington who is representing the men, told justices that the term “boy” is offensive and is considered a slur by other courts.



“This form of verbal abuse has its origins in the slave era,” he wrote in the appeal.



In sending the case back to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, the court released an unsigned opinion. Alito apparently joined his colleagues in the opinion, in which the court said: “Although it is true the disputed word will not always be evidence of racial animus, it does not follow that the term, standing alone, is always benign.”



The lawyers for Tyson Foods said that evidence showed the manager “was rude and curt to all employees — white and black — but had never used racial epithets.”



Ash and Hithon were among six people who sued under a 1964 civil rights law



The manager, Tom Hatley, had been brought in to fix problems at the Gadsden, Ala., plant which was losing as much as $250,000 a week, the company said.




Two white shift managers quit after he withheld their pay raises, and Ash and Hithon applied for the jobs.



The case is Ash v. Tyson Foods, 05-379.





journalstar.com
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
So Tyson admits the management it sends to "fix" things is rude and curt.

They then say to the news reporters that:

The manager, Tom Hatley, had been brought in to fix problems at the Gadsden, Ala., plant which was losing as much as $250,000 a week, the company said.

If you read the appellate decision, you will see that they failed to present this evidence of losing money per week in the trial. Maybe they were worried about where all the money they lost was going.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
The court unanimously overturned an appeals court decision that said use of the term “boy” alone was not evidence of workplace discrimination and ordered the appeals court to reconsider the matter.

This case was not about whether or not the term "BOYS" is discriminatory, this case was about whether or not the reason Tyson passed over these two black "workers" (that word is probably considered discriminatory too) to hire a white worker was based on discrimination.

Just like Johnnie Cochran, they'll play the race card for all it's worth and pretty soon companies will hire blacks over whites based solely on race and fear of lawsuits as opposed to hiring the most qualified workers.

$1.75 MILLION in damages and you question whether a jury gets it wrong sometimes?

Good grief!



~SH~
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
~SH~ said:
The court unanimously overturned an appeals court decision that said use of the term “boy” alone was not evidence of workplace discrimination and ordered the appeals court to reconsider the matter.

This case was not about whether or not the term "BOYS" is discriminatory, this case was about whether or not the reason Tyson passed over these two black "workers" (that word is probably considered discriminatory too) to hire a white worker was based on discrimination.

Just like Johnnie Cochran, they'll play the race card for all it's worth and pretty soon companies will hire blacks over whites based solely on race and fear of lawsuits as opposed to hiring the most qualified workers.

$1.75 MILLION in damages and you question whether a jury gets it wrong sometimes?

Good grief!



~SH~

No, SH, by the time the 11th circuit got through with it and it went to the Supreme Court, the case was about the 11th circuit minimizing the case so they could throw it out. The Supreme Court didn't let them get away with it.
 
Top