Opinion ID: 2516473
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Analytical Framework in Circumstantial Discrimination Cases

Text: The McDonnell Douglas framework involves three steps. First, the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of discrimination by demonstrating, by a preponderance of evidence, the following four elements: (1) that plaintiff is a member of a protected class; (2) that plaintiff is qualified for the position for which plaintiff has applied or from which plaintiff has been discharged; (3) that plaintiff has suffered some adverse employment action, such as a discharge; and (4) that the position still exists. See McDonnell Douglas, 411 U.S. at 802, 93 S.Ct. 1817; Texas Dep't of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 253 n. 6, 101 S.Ct. 1089, 67 L.Ed.2d 207 (1981) (reaffirming elements of the prima facie case as set forth in McDonnell Douglas ); see also Teague, 89 Hawai`i at 279 n. 10, 971 P.2d at 1114 n. 10 (citing Furukawa, 85 Hawai`i at 12, 936 P.2d at 648). Once the plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of discrimination, the burden of production shifts to the defendant to articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the adverse employment action. See McDonnell Douglas, 411 U.S. at 802-03, 93 S.Ct. 1817; see also Teague, 89 Hawai`i at 279 n. 10, 971 P.2d at 1114 n. 10 (citing Furukawa, 85 Hawai`i at 12, 936 P.2d at 648). The employer's explanation must be in the form of admissible evidence and must clearly set forth reasons that, if believed by the trier of fact, would support a finding that unlawful discrimination was not the cause of the challenged employment action. Burdine, 450 U.S. at 254-55, 101 S.Ct. 1089. Although the burden of production is shifted to the employer, (t)he ultimate burden of persuading the trier of fact that the employer intentionally discriminated against the plaintiff remains at all times with the plaintiff. Id. at 253 (citing Board of Trustees of Keene State College v. Sweeney, 439 U.S. 24, 25 n. 2, 99 S.Ct. 295, 58 L.Ed.2d 216 (1978)). Finally, if the employer rebuts the prima facie case, the burden reverts to the plaintiff to demonstrate that the defendant's proffered reasons were pretextual. See McDonnell Douglas, 411 U.S. at 804, 93 S.Ct. 1817; Burdine, 450 U.S. at 254-55, 101 S.Ct. 1089; Harrison v. Metropolitan Gov't of Nashville & Davidson County, 80 F.3d 1107 (6th Cir.1996) (African American officer showed that the reasons given by the employer were pretextual by adducing evidence that a white officer was not terminated for comparable reasons), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 863, 117 S.Ct. 169, 136 L.Ed.2d 111 (1996); see also Teague, 89 Hawai`i at 279 n. 10, 971 P.2d at 1114 n. 10 (citing Furukawa, 85 Hawai`i at 12, 936 P.2d at 648). A plaintiff may establish pretext either directly by persuading the court that a discriminatory reason more likely motivated the employer or indirectly by showing that the employer's proffered explanation is unworthy of credence. Burdine, 450 U.S. at 256, 101 S.Ct. 1089 (citing McDonnell Douglas, 411 U.S. at 804-05, 93 S.Ct. 1817). If the plaintiff establishes that defendant's proffered reasons were pretextual, the trier of fact may, but is not required to, find for the plaintiff. At all times, the burden of persuasion remains on the plaintiff. Teague, 89 Hawai`i at 279 n. 10, 971 P.2d at 1114 n. 10 (citing Furukawa, 85 Hawai`i at 12-13, 936 P.2d at 648-49).