Opinion ID: 2978769
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Henry Beasley

Text: Henry Beasley was employed at Whirlpool’s La Vergne facility from 1984 until 2006, when he was terminated for violations of company policy several days after his deposition in this case. In support of his hostile work environment claim, Beasley, like his co-plaintiffs, urges the court to consider incidents of racial harassment that he neither witnessed nor learned of outside the context of this litigation. Beasley also relies heavily on continuous harassment by Dale Travis, who “said something racially offensive anytime, almost, he opened his mouth.” Beasley testified that Travis once had asked Beasley whether he thought there should be a James Earl Ray Day, and that Travis had called African-American employees “ni” and “white boy,” and other derogatory terms. Beasley stated that although Travis had improved his behavior temporarily after Beasley had reported Travis to a supervisor, Travis had gone “right back to it.” In addition to his deposition testimony concerning Travis, Beasley testified to other incidents at the plant. He stated that he had once heard two co-workers laughing and saying that an AfricanAmerican man who had been dragged to his death behind a pick-up truck in Texas “probably deserved it.” Beasley stated that the restrooms at the Whirlpool facility were full of racist graffiti and that they always had been, and he provided photographs showing graffiti including the letters -6- No. 08-6376 Armstrong v. Whirlpool “KKK.” He further testified that he had complained about this graffiti in 2003 or 2004, but that it had not been removed until July of 2005, after the commencement of this lawsuit. He also asserted that he had observed a spare truck with graffiti showing the image of a person with a rope around his neck, and that he was aware that an African-American employee had once found manure on a truck that she used during her shift. Beasley testified that supervisors and co-workers regularly made racist jokes, including jokes about O.J. Simpson and Rodney King. In addition to this hostile work environment claim, Beasley added a claim for retaliatory discharge after Whirlpool terminated his employment for violations of company policy with regard to a supervisor’s notebook that Cash claimed to have found on the floor and that Beasley later concealed from Whirlpool. Some time before his deposition, Beasley began an email correspondence with Whirlpool Director of Human Resources Fred Contreras, claiming that he knew Whirlpool was keeping notes on him. Beasley met with Contreras and told Contreras that he had factual evidence of the surveillance. At that meeting and in an email afterwards, Contreras asked for more information about the source of Beasley’s information, but Beasley stated that he “just knew.” Contreras responded that Beasley’s vague statements had “prevented [Contreras] from more fully understanding [Beasley’s] concerns.” Whirlpool first learned of the notebook during Beasley’s deposition, when Whirlpool’s attorney asked about Beasley’s claims that Whirlpool was monitoring him. Beasley testified that he had known he was being monitored partly because “we found some information . . . that the supervisor was keeping notes on us.” When asked who that supervisor was, Beasley stated that it was Bill Westberry. Beasley also stated that Cash had given him the notebook -7- No. 08-6376 Armstrong v. Whirlpool and that Cash had claimed to have found it on the factory floor. Beasley felt that the notebook was evidence of animosity towards him for his participation in the lawsuit because it contained notes on his actions in the factory, but the notebook also contained notes on a number of other Whirlpool employees, both Caucasian and African American. Several days after his deposition, Beasley was terminated for violations of company policy. To support the termination, Whirlpool relied on a rule allowing for “immediate termination for either dishonesty or hiding a co-worker’s property.” Beasley filed a grievance, and an independent arbitrator found that the termination was justified because Beasley had taken a co-worker’s property and had lied about it not only to management, but also at his deposition and in the context of the arbitration hearing itself. Beasley then added this claim for retaliatory discharge.