Case Study for Canady vs Walmart Essay Example for Free

Case Study for Canady vs Walmart Essay 1. In your own words, what does pretext mean? Pretext is a reason given in justification of a course of action that is not the real reason. 2. Write a paragraph that supports the argument that Canady’s dismissal was based on racial discrimination. Canady’s would say that his dismissal was based on racial discrimination because Smith a manager introduced himself as a slave driver. Next Smith, ask Canady â€Å"What’s up, my nigga?† and was also referred to as a â€Å"lawn jockey†. He also claimed that Smith made states that all African American look alike, and that his skin color wiped off on towels. Since Canady did not report these comments when Smith made them; Smith continued to use the phase from the Rush Hour movie. He could also believe that the day we was left in the department by himself that management was discriminating against him because he was left to do all the work with no help. 3. Write a paragraph that supports that argument that Wal-Mart’s decision was based on Canady’s insubordination. Wal-Mart’s decision was based on insubordination for one Canady was eating in an area where there are policies in place that prohibits easting in the food preparation area. When asked to stop eating in the prohibited area Canady started an argument with management. After the store manager was called to help with the situation Canady continued argue loudly in front of customers and other associates. Candy did not follow the policy that does not allow employees to eat in the food preparation area and he was arguing with management in front of other was insubordination. 4. Research the case. How did the court rule? Why did they rule in this manner? The wrongful termination claim, that claim fails to make out a prima facie case in that Canady failed to establish the fourth prong (i.e. that there are facts that permit an inference of discrimination). Alternatively, even if Canady made out a prima facie case, he failed to present sufficient evidence of pretext. The fact that Smith made racially offensive remarks is of no consequence because those remarks were made outside of the decision making process. The ruling on the hostile work environment claim, the Court found that Smith’s comments are not sufficiently offensive to the actionable. The Circuit Judge Lay dissents.