(Caucasian), Ruth Lambach (Caucasian), Steve Perrine (Caucasian), Sheldon Silver (Caucasian),
Frances Westbrook (Caucasian), Carol Redding (African-American), Kathy Krokar (Caucasian), and
Sonia Nassief (Asian). (Id., 24).

Shortly after her interview, Henry received a telephone call to schedule an interview with
Dr. Helm and Vice-President Doctor Marguerite Boyd. (Def.’s 56.1(a)(3) Statement 25). Because
of knee surgery on April 5, 2002, Henry was unable to interview with Dr. Helm and Dr. Boyd face-
to-face. (Id., ff] 26-27). To accommodate Henry, a telephone interview was scheduled with
Dr. Helm and Dr. Boyd for April 15, 2002. (Id., § 28).

During the telephone interview, Dr. Helm and Dr. Boyd communicated with Henry via a
speaker phone. (Def.’s $6.1(a)(3) Statement {j 29). Henry does not recall anything specific about
the interview with Dr. Helm and Dr. Boyd. (Id., 930). At most, Henry recalls Dr Helm and
Dr. Boyd’s asking how she would handle hypothetical situations if she was an administrator.

dd., 431).

Dr. Helm asked Henry the same types of questions she asked all other applicants for the
Adult Education Manager position. (Def.’s 56.1(a)(3) Statement J 32). Dr. Helm recalls asking the
applicants how they would create a faculty evaluation system, what they considered to be “good
teaching” and how they would interact with the teachers as an administrator. (Id., 33). At the end
of Henry’s interview, Dr. Heim informed Henry that other candidates were being interviewed and
that she would be contacted if the College decided to extend her an offer for the position. (Id., 134).

In addition to Henry, Dr. Helm interviewed Lambach, Perrine, Silver, McCormick, and
Dianne Torres (Hispanic) for the two Adult Education Manager positions. (Def.’s 56.1(a)(3)

Statement 35). Torres initially applied for a Spanish faculty position at Truman College and was


protected class who had similar or lesser qualifications than she did. The undisputed facts
demonstrate that Torres was more qualified for the position than Henry and that Torres had the
experience and qualifications required, and sought by Dr. Helm, for the position.

Even if Henry was able to establish a prima facie case, she has failed to establish that
Dr. Helm’s reasons for not hiring her were a pretext to race discrimination. A plaintiff can establish
pretext by showing that the employer’s explanation is unworthy of credence or that a discriminatory
reason more likely motivated the employer. Debs v. Northeastern Illinois Univ., 153 F.3d 390, 395
(7th Cir. 1998) (Debs). Pretext in this context does not mean a mistake; rather, it means “a lie,
specifically a phony reason for some action.” Russell v. Acme-Evans Co., 51 F.3d 64, 68 (7th Cir
1995). An honest belief in the nondiscriminatory reason offered by the decision-maker will be
sufficient even if the reasons are foolish, trivial, or even baseless. Debs, 153 F.3d at 396.

Here, Dr. Helms did not know that Henry was African-American at the time of the interviews
or the recommendation of Torres for the position. Furthermore, as indicated above, the undisputed
facts demonstrate that Torres met the required qualifications for the position and was more qualified
for the position than Henry. Henry has failed to establish that Dr. Helm’s hiring of Torres because
of her superior qualifications, instead of Henry, was a pretext to discrimination.

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s Motion for Sumi Juf[gment is granted.

| 1 Alenrak.
Dated: 1°23 -o4 i :

(oan W. DARRAH

United States District Judge



(Id., 50). Between 1993 and 1998; Henry taught English as a Second Language on a part-time
basis. (Id., J 51). Between 1987 and 1993, Henry was employed as a non-tenured teacher at three
different high schools. Henry did not attain tenure at any of the schools. (Id., 52). Henry has no
supervisory or administrative experience. (Id., § 53). Henry has no independent knowledge
regarding Torres’ qualifications for the Adult Education Manager position. (Id., { 54).

Torres has a Master’s Degree in Spanish/Latin American Studies and has completed all pre-
thesis requirements for her Ph.D. (Def.’s 56.1(a)(3) Statement ] 55). Torres is multi-lingual and has
worked as an International Program Director for McDonnell Douglas Corporation for eight years.
(id., {] 56-57). As International Program Director for McDonnell Douglas, Torres was part of a
four-person management team responsible for analyzing and developing trade and image
enhancement projects for the Ministry of Defense. Her team also initiated , implemented, and
managed programs, including an international business internship program, and organized
international training seminars. (Id., | 58).

Torres also worked as a college administrator for a university in Columbia for ten years.
(Def.’s 56.1(a)(3) Statement { 59). While working in Columbia, Torres co-founded and participated
in a major reorganization of the humanities academic program, introducing change at all institutional
levels. This project included organizing international faculty and students. At the same time, Torres
chaired the Department of Spanish and Latin American Literature and was an Associate Professor
of Spanish Literature and Literary Criticism. (Id., | 60). Torres also has a significant amount of
experience infusing technology in the classroom based on her experience at Adlai Stevenson High
School. (Id.,]62). Torres has experience teaching ESL and discussed this experience with Dr. Helm

during her interview. (Id., J{] 63-64).


interviewed by a faculty screening committee, not by Mata’s Committee. (Id., ]36). Based on the
recommendation of the faculty screening committee, Dr. Helm initially interviewed Torres for the
faculty position. (Id., 138). Dr. Helm thought that Torres’s experience and background made her
highly qualified for the Adult Education Manager position. (Id., § 39).

On April 18, 2002, Dr. Helm interviewed Torres for the Adult Education Manager position.
Mata, Darnton, and Dr. Boyd also participated in the interview. (Def.’s 56.1(a)(3) Statement { 40).
On April 19, 2002, Dr. Helm recommended Torres and Lambach for the two Adult Education
Manager positions at Truman College. (Id., 41). Dr. Helm’s recommendation to hire Torres was
supported by Mata, Dr, Boyd, and Doctor Roberson, the Vice Chancellor for Adult Education. (Id.,
4 42).

According to Henry, the decision to hire Lambach instead of her for the position was not
discriminatory because Lambach was interviewed by Mata’s Committee. (Def.’s 56.1(a)(3)
Statement | 43). Instead, Henry claims the decision to hire Torres instead of Henry was
discriminatory. Henry admits that she has no direct evidence that she was not selected for the
position because of her race. (Id., | 44). Other than the fact that Torres did not meet with Mata’s
Committee, Henry has no facts supporting her claim of race discrimination. (Id., { 45).

Mata’s Committee also interviewed Caucasian applicants who were neither interviewed by
Dr. Helm nor recommended for the Adult Education Manager position. (Def.’s 56.1(a)(3) Statement
46). Dr. Helm never met Henry and did not learn that Henry was African-American until after she
made the recommendation to hire Torres and Lambach. (Id., { 47).

Henry has a Master’s Degree in Linguistics and speaks only English fluently. (Def.’s

56.1(a)(3) Statement ff 48-49). Henry taught English as a Second Language, full-time, since 1998.


Serv., Inc., 123 F.3d 438, 443 (7th Cir. 1997). Henry has not presented any direct evidence of
discrimination; thus, the focus is on the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting method.

Under the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting test, the plaintiff must first establish a prima
facie case by the preponderance of the evidence. Jackson, 176 F.3d at 982, If the plaintiff
establishes a prima facie case, a rebuttable presumption is created; and the employer must come
forward with evidence of a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its actions. If the employer
meets this requirement, the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to demonstrate, again, by a
preponderance of the evidence, that reasons proffered by the employer are actually a pretext for
discrimination. McDonnell Douglas, 411 U.S. at 804; Adreani v. First Colonial Bankshares Corp.,
154 F.3d 389, 394 (7th Cir. 1998) (Adreani).

To establish a prima facie case of race discrimination, a plaintiff must establish that: (1) she
is a member of a protected class; (2) she applied and was qualified for a job for which the employer
was seeking applicants; (3) that, despite her qualifications, she was rejected; and (4) the position was
given to someone outside of her protected class who had similar or lesser qualifications than she did.
See Malacara v. City of Madison, 224 F.3d 727, 729 (7" Cir. 2000).

Plaintiff has established that she is a member of a protected class and that she applied for the
position of Adult Education Manager. However, she has failed to establish that she was qualified
for the position for which she applied. The position required five years of administrative experience
in Adult Education and/or ESL programs or an equivalent combination of training and experience.
Henry concedes that she lacked the supervisory and/or administrative experience necessary for the
position.

Plaintiff also failed to establish that the position was given to someone outside of her



Minute Order Form (06/97)

uy United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois
Name of Assigned Judi Sitting Judge if Othe
or Mogistate Judge John W. Darrah thon assigned Sudge
CASE NUMBER 03 C 3187 DATE 7128/2004
CASE Henry vs. City Colleges of Chicago
TITLE

[In the following box (a) indicate the party filing the motion, e.g., plaintiff, defendant, 3rd party plaintiff, and (b) state briefly the nature
of the motion being presented.]

MOTION:

DOCKET ENTRY:

(1) Oo Filed motion of [ use listing in “Motion” box above.)

(2) oOo Brief in support of motion due

(3) oOo Answer brief to motion due___. Reply to answer brief due.

(4) Oo Ruling/Hearingon__setfor____at

(5) im Status hearing{held/continued to] [set for/re-set for]on___ set for at

(6) Oo Pretrial conference(held/continued to] [set for/re-set for]on__—ssetfor_—at_

(7) Oo Trial[set for/re-set for]on_____at

(8) o (Bench/Jury trial] [Hearing] held/continuedto_____att

(9) im This case is dismissed [with/without] prejudice and without costs[by/agreement/pursuant to]
OOFRCP4(m) CLocal Rule 41.1 OFRCP41(a)(1) OM FRCP41(a)(2).

qo) =f [Other docket entry] For the reasons stated in the attached memorandum opinion and order,

defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted. Enter Memorandum Opinion and Order. Pretrial
conference set for 9/7/04 and jury trial set for 10/4/04 are vacated.

(il) @ [For further detail see order attached to the original minute order.]

No notices required, advised in open court. a

No notices required
a number of notices

Notices mailed by judge’s staff. JUL 99 00d

Notified counsel by telephone.

date docketed

Y | Docketing to mail notices, ul.
ov Mail AO 450 form. “ot

docketing deputy iniifls

Copy to judge/magistrate judge.

ant Het date mailed notice _S

courtroom
MF deputy’s
initials

Date/time recéive irs ; ;
centrat.Clerk’s Office mailing depoly initials



Dr. Helm’s decision to recommend Torres for the position was based primarily on her
extensive administrative and supervisory experience, her experience evaluating faculty, her strong
academic background, and the fact that she is multi-lingual. (Def.’s 56.1(a)(3) Statement § 65).
Dr. Helm was very impressed with Torres’ experience at McDonnell Douglas and at Columbia, as
well as her ability to get colleagues to participate in developing and utilizing computer programs in
the classroom. (Id., § 66).

As to Henry, Dr. Helm was concerned about Henry’s lack of supervisory or administrative
experience, (Def.’s 56.1(a)(3) Statement | 67). Dr. Helm was also concerned that Henry had taught
at a number of different schools but had left each one prior to attaining tenure. (Id., ] 68). Based
on Torres’ experience and background, Dr. Helm believed that Torres was more qualified than Henry
for the Adult Education Manager position. (Id., § 69). Henry admits that Dr. Helm may have
thought that Henry was unqualified for the position. (Id., { 70).

Title VII makes it unlawful for an employer to fail or refuse to hire an individual, or
otherwise discriminate against an individual with respect to her compensation, based on that person’s
race. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1). A plaintiff may prove discrimination through either direct or
circumstantial evidence or the indirect burden-shifting method established in McDonnell Douglas
Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973). Jackson v. E.J. Brach Corp., 176 F.3d 971, 982 (7th Cir.
1999) (Jackson). Direct evidence is defined as “evidence ‘which if believed by the trier of fact, will
prove the particular fact in question without reliance on inference or presumption.” Plair v. EJ.
Brach & Sons, 105 F.3d 343, 347 (7th Cir. 1997) (citation omitted). In an employment
discrimination case, direct evidence must speak directly to the issue of discriminatory intent, and it

must relate to the specific employment decision in question. Cowen v. Glenbrook Security


education and/or ESL programs or an equivalent combination of training and experience. (Id., 411).
The Adult Education Manager is expected to perform the following administrative functions:
conduct performance evaluations; conduct interviews; make hiring and disciplinary
recommendations; develop remediation plans; participate in pre-disciplinary meetings; participate
in policy and strategy development; administer the collective bargaining agreement; assist in the
development of curriculum; develop training plans for staff improvement and professional
development; conduct training classes; plan and conduct staff meetings; develop procedures for
program implementation; analyze program data and prepare reports for executive staff; participate
in budget planning; and perform other related management, supervisory and administrative duties
as needed. (Id., ] 13). Most important to Dr. Helm was that candidates for the position have
experience supervising and evaluating faculty. (Id., 12).

Armando Mata, Dean of Adult Education at Truman College, created a committee to screen
candidates for the Adult Education Manager positions. (Def.’s 56.1(a)(3) Statement { 16). Dr. Helm
did not direct Mata to create the Committee nor did she have any involvement with the Committee’s
interview process. (Id., 17). As President of Truman College, Dr. Helm interviewed candidates
for professional-level positions before making hiring recommendations to the Chancellor. (Id., 18).

On March 25, 2002, Henry, an African-American, sent Mata a letter in which she expressed
her interest in an Adult Education Manager position at Truman College. (Def.’s 56.1(a)(3)
Statement {J 1, 19). As of that date, Henry was employed as a teacher at College of Lake County.
(Id., 4 20). On April 4, 2002, Henry was interviewed by Mata’s Committee. (Id., 21). At the end
of the interview, Mata told Henry that she would be contacted if she was selected to interview with

Dr. Helm. (Id., § 23). In addition to Henry, Mata’s Committee interviewed Carol McCormick


In the instant case, Henry did not file a response to the City Colleges’ motion and has not
disputed any of City Colleges’ statements of material facts. Therefore, all the material facts averred
by City Colleges are deemed admitted. See Oates v. Discovery Zone, 116 F.3d 1161, 1167 (7th Cir.
1997); L.R. 56.1(b)(3)(B). Even though Henry failed to respond to City Colleges’ statement of
material facts and such facts are deemed admitted, City Colleges’ Motion for Summary Judgment
will only be granted if it can demonstrate that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that they
are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Johnson y. Gudmundson, 35 F.3d 1104, 1112 (7th
Cir. 1994).

City Colleges operates seven independently accredited community colleges in the City of
Chicago. (Def.’s 56.1(a)(3) Statement { 2). City Colleges provides educational services to students,
including the Adult Education Department at Truman College where GED courses, English as a
Second Language (“ESL”), and Civics is taught. (Id., {| 3-4).

Doctor Phoebe Helm was the President of City Colleges’ Truman College. (Def.’s 56.1 (a)(3)
Statement ] 5). Among her duties as President was the responsibility for making hiring
recommendations to the Chancellor, who in turn made recommendations to the Board of Trustees.
(Id., 6).

In March 2002, City Colleges posted a vacancy for two Adult Education Manager positions
at Truman College. (Def.’s 56.1(a)(3) Statement 7). This position was new to City Colleges for
the 2002-2003 school year. (Id., 4} 8). The primary role of the Adult Education Manager is to
provide leadership, management, and direction to the Adult Education Department and its staff. (id.,
19). The qualifications for the position are set forth in the job posting and job description. (Id., J

10). A required qualification for the position is five years of administrative experience in adult


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION
DITRA HENRY, ) QRae|
Plaintiff, ‘ JUL 29
v. : No. 03 C3187
CITY COLLEGES OF CHICAGO, ) Judge John W. Darrah
Defendant. ;

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiff, Ditra Henry, filed suit against Defendant, City Colleges of Chicago, alleging
Defendant discriminated against her on the basis of her race in violation of Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000(e). Presently before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for
Summary Judgment.

Summary judgment is proper if “the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and
admissions on file, together with affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any
material fact.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c); see also Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 (1986).
All the evidence and the reasonable inferences that may be drawn from the evidence are viewed in
the light most favorable to the nonmovant. Miller v. American Family Mutual Ins. Co., 203 F.3d
997, 1003 (7th Cir. 2000). Summary judgment may be granted when no “reasonable jury could
return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248
(1986). However, a party cannot defeat summary judgment by relying on unsubstantiated facts. See

Greer y. Board of Educ. of the City of Chicago, 267 F.3d 723, 729 (7th Cir. 2001).

(eZ