Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 383814_pub.pdf

Related Parts of This Source

1,755 chars

was sufficient to survive summary judgment. Mackey, 12 Wn. App. 2d at 571. Under

this framework, the employee has the burden of demonstrating a prima facie case by

producing evidence that she was within the protected class, discharged by the defendant,

and doing satisfactory work. Id. If the employer can then demonstrate a legitimate

nondiscriminatory reason for the termination, the burden shifts back, and the employee

must show that this reason is a pretext. Id.

On appeal, the parties do not go through this analysis. Regardless, because there

is rarely direct evidence of discriminatory motive, “[s]ummary judgment for an employer

is rarely appropriate in a discriminatory discharge case.” Id.

We have already determined that there are genuine issues of material fact as to

whether accommodating Suarez’s request for leave on September 29 caused an undue

hardship. In Ansonia, the Court recognized that if a leave benefit provided in the

collective bargaining agreement was being implemented in a discriminatory manner, this

would give rise to a claim for discrimination. 479 U.S. at 71.

Here, Suarez alleges that she was terminated for exercising her religious beliefs.

She claims that accommodating her beliefs by granting unpaid leave did not create an

undue hardship because employees frequently called in as unavailable, and the School

used a process for covering those shifts. She notes that three other employees also called

in as unavailable on September 29, and there is no indication that they were disciplined or

29
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

No. 38381-4-III
Suarez v. State

terminated. This evidence is sufficient to raise a prima facie case of discrimination. As