Paula Deen Ruling Shows Limits of "Zone of Interest" Employment Discrimination Claims

Author: Beth P. Zoller, XpertHR Legal Editor

August 27, 2013

As the recent dismissal of the race discrimination claim against celebrity chef Paula Deen illustrates, employees who are not directly affected by unlawful racial discrimination may not sue under federal antidiscrimination laws to remedy racial discrimination directed toward third parties.

In Jackson v. Deen, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113458 (S.D. Ga. Aug. 12, 2013), Lisa Jackson, a white female employee working for Paula Deen's restaurant, alleged that she was subject to repeated racial harassment and discrimination over a period of five years. Although she is white, Jackson alleged that a "racially biased attitude" pervaded Deen's restaurant operations, and that she was subject to racist jokes and comments. Jackson claimed that although she repeatedly complained, Deen failed to remedy the harassment and discrimination.

The US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia dismissed the case, finding that Jackson was not an aggrieved party under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 "because her interests are not those arguably sought to be protected by that statute." The court stated that "at best, Plaintiff is an accidental victim of the alleged racial discrimination." The court focused on the fact that there were no allegations of racially offensive comments or statements directed to Jackson or intended to harass her personally.

In reaching this conclusion, the court relied on the "zone of interest test" as set forth by the Supreme Court in Thompson v. North American Stainless, LP, 131 S.Ct. 863 (2011). In that case, the Court held that an individual is permitted to sue when he or she "falls within the zone of interests sought to be protected by the statutory provision" at issue. Therefore, a terminated male employee could sue under Title VII even though it was his fiancée who engaged in protected activity by filing a sexual harassment claim against their employer. Unlike in the Deen case, the plaintiff in Thompson was in the zone of interest and not an accidental victim because hurting him was the unlawful act through which the employer punished his fiancée.

The court explicitly rejected Jackson's argument that Title VII and Section 1981 "provide individuals working unaffected by unlawful racial discrimination with a cause of action to remedy racial discrimination directed toward third parties." The court stated that Title VII and Section 1981 did not protect Jackson's interest in harmonious working relations with African-American co-workers and the right to work free from racial harassment, and it only serves to prevent individuals from being discriminated against by their employers in connection with the terms and condition of their employment.