Race Discrimination Is Illegal in New York City Workplaces
Race discrimination occurs when an employer treats an employee worse because of race, color, ethnicity, ancestry, national origin, hairstyle associated with race, or perceived racial identity. It can happen in hiring, compensation, job assignments, discipline, promotion, performance reviews, layoffs, termination, and workplace harassment. It can also happen when a company protects a racist manager, CEO, owner, partner, or executive instead of protecting the employee who is being targeted.
In New York City, employees are protected by the New York City Human Rights Law, N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107. New York State employees may also be protected by the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 296. Federal law, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, also prohibits race discrimination.
What Counts as Race Discrimination?
Race discrimination may include:
- Being disciplined more harshly than employees of another race.
- Being passed over for promotions despite stronger qualifications.
- Being assigned less desirable work, fewer clients, or worse shifts.
- Being paid less than similarly situated employees.
- Being subjected to racial slurs, coded language, stereotypes, or “jokes.”
- Being criticized for natural hair, braids, locs, twists, or other race-associated hairstyles.
- Being fired after complaining about racial bias.
- Being excluded from leadership opportunities because executives say an employee is not the “right fit.”
Discrimination is often subtle. Employers rarely admit that race played a role. Instead, they may claim the issue was “performance,” “culture fit,” “communication style,” or “restructuring.” A discrimination claim may rely on patterns, timing, comparators, shifting explanations, biased comments, unequal enforcement of rules, and the employer’s response to complaints.
Hostile Work Environment Based on Race
A racially hostile work environment may exist when racial conduct makes the workplace abusive, humiliating, or unequal. Federal cases often ask whether conduct was severe or pervasive. The Second Circuit’s decision in Patterson v. County of Oneida, 375 F.3d 206 (2d Cir. 2004) discusses racially hostile work environment claims under federal law. New York City law is broader and asks whether the employee was treated less well, at least in part, because of race, while still excluding truly petty slights and trivial inconveniences under the framework discussed in Mihalik v. Credit Agricole Cheuvreux N. Am., Inc..
Retaliation After Complaining About Race Discrimination
It is unlawful for an employer to punish an employee for opposing race discrimination. Protected activity can include reporting racist comments, complaining to HR, objecting to unequal discipline, supporting a coworker’s discrimination complaint, or filing a charge with an agency. Retaliation may include termination, demotion, reduced hours, loss of accounts, threats, negative reviews, or efforts to push the employee out.
New Jersey Race Discrimination Claims
Employees working in New Jersey may have claims under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J.S.A. 10:5-12. The NJ LAD broadly prohibits discrimination and harassment based on race and other protected traits. In hostile work environment cases, New Jersey courts often look to the standard described in Lehmann v. Toys “R” Us, Inc., which asks whether discriminatory conduct would not have occurred but for the protected trait and was severe or pervasive enough to make a reasonable person believe the working conditions were hostile or abusive.
Related Fingerhut Law Pages
Hostile Work Environment, Wrongful Termination, Retaliation for Protected Activity, Prior Criminal Conviction Discrimination, NJ LAD.
Contact Fingerhut Law
If you believe you were mistreated, harassed, disciplined, denied opportunities, or fired because of race, contact Fingerhut Law for a confidential consultation.
Attorney Advertising Disclaimer: This article is attorney advertising and is provided for general informational purposes only. It does not create an attorney-client relationship and is not legal advice. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.