![\"\"\/](\"https:\/\/www.hrdive.com\/static\/img\/play.svg?313321260226\")
\n Listen to the article<\/p>\n
\n Listen to the article<\/p>\n
3 min<\/p>\n
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback<\/a>.<\/p>\n Dive Brief:<\/p>\n A former city of Tampa employee failed to show he was subjected to a hostile work environment based on his Cuban origin and fired because he complained, a federal district court in Florida held July 6. Dive Insight:<\/p>\n The ruling is another example of how Title VII limits actionable harassment: None of the alleged incidents directly referred to the employee or contained any derogatory racial or ethnic slurs, and one had no evident connection to national origin at all, the court said.<\/p>\n Only three incidents expressly referenced Hispanic employees, while the remaining incidents required a listener to infer the speaker was even referring to Hispanics or had any anti-Hispanic animus, the court added.<\/p>\n \u201cUnder these circumstances, no reasonable person could conclude that the conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive to create an objectively hostile or abusive work environment,\u201d the court held.<\/p>\n The employee also failed to show he engaged in statutorily protected activity, a required element of retaliation claims under Title VII. While he may have subjectively believed he was harassed because of his Cuban origins, he could not in good faith have believed the conduct he reported was unlawful, the court found.\u00a0<\/p>\n Rather, \u201cfor the reasons explained in connection with the harassment claim, the conduct the plaintiff opposed was unquestionably lawful,\u201d it said.<\/p>\n In any event, the city provided legitimate, nonpretextual reasons for firing the employee, ultimately defeating his retaliation claim, the court held.<\/p>\n
\nPer the ruling in Chavez v. City of Tampa Water Department<\/a>, the employee had to obtain successive state licenses to maintain his job at a wastewater treatment plant. The city fired him for submitting a license application that falsely stated he met its hours requirement \u2014 two days after he was told he was more than 500 hours short. The city also charged him with allegedly coercing a co-worker to sign the application and for not showing up for a mandatory fitness for duty evaluation after he sent government officials an inflammatory video disputing the fraud charges.
\nThe employee sued the city for harassment and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Florida law. He claimed he had been harassed because he is Hispanic, citing eight unwelcome incidents over a five-year period. He also alleged he was fired for reporting them. The court granted summary judgment to the city.<\/p>\n