Tagged: employment discriminaiton
“[E]vidence of employer dishonesty is not required by Title VII itself. The statute requires only that a plaintiff demonstrate that her employer’s decision was taken ‘because of race, sex or some other prohibited characteristic.’ In spite of using some language suggesting that dishonesty is an element of a discrimination claim, the Supreme Court has never held that evidence of mendacity is the only form of proof available to a Title VII plaintiff. In fact, in one of its more recent opinions construing Title VII, the Court noted that evidence suggesting a defendant’s explanation for an employment practice is ‘unworthy of credence is simply one form of circumstantial evidence that is probative of intentional discrimination.’ As the Court recognized, a plaintiff does not have to prove that her employer lied in order to raise a reasonable inference that discrimination played a role in the decision.”
Source: William R. Corbett, Unmasking A Pretext For Res Ipsa Loquittur: A Proposal To Let Employment Discrimination Speak For Itself. 62 Am. U. L. Rev. 447, 451 2013.
there is nothing they can say at this point that can refute the pyramid of evidence i have proving institutionalized racism in Hollywood & how corruption is vertically integrated throughout America’s judicial system. #fact
No matter what Arbitrator David L. Gregory decides in this case next month, that decision will have to be appealed because he denied me due process by prematurely and erroneously dismissing both of my conspiracy claims in his third Interim Decision, while simultaneously admitting smoking-gun, spoliated evidence that proves all of my claims, including claims of antitrust violations and conspiracy to interfere with civil rights! Smh. The fact that he has now admitted “Exhibit 31” into the evidence of the record after Republican appointed federal judge Robert P. Patterson dismissed it 8 years ago as an “unidentified and unauthenticated document” in Rowe Entertainment v. William Morris Agency et al., further PROVES what I have been arguing for nearly the last three years: the “discrimination” provision and/or the two arbitration agreements i signed as a condition of employment are unconscionable, tainted with illegality and malum in se AND arbitration is an inappropriate forum for this case because the public policy goals of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Sherman Act and additional statutes being used to help eradicate institutionalized racism and employment discrimination throughout Hollywood (particularly at William Morris Endeavor Entertainment) cannot be effectuated in such an inadequate, quasi-judicial forum. This case should remain in the federal court and be decided by an impartial jury reflecting the diversity of New York City!!!
Me Against Iniquity: Understanding the Complexities of Global White Supremacy (Racism) Through The Eyes of an Unapologetically BLACK Intellectual 