I
COURT VICTORIES FOR THE UNIVERSITY
[ion University has two decisive wins
indiscrimination suits against former
Elon News Network Staff
lelGimewsnetwork
Rodriguez
driguez also argues that the district court
erred in rejecting his claim of construc
tive discharge, which means resigning be
cause of a hostile work environment.
But the appeals court agrees with the
district courts rejection of this claim by
stating even though Rodriguez felt “unwel
comed” after being denied tenure, that this
is not a reason to show he suffered from
intolerable working conditions.
Matias
Elon University has won an appeal to a
discrimination lawsuit.
Michael Rodriguez, former assistant
professor of business, sued Elon University
in January 2017 for discrimination based
on the fact that Rodriguez was not granted
tenure, nor was his contract renewed.
Rodriguez lost the original lawsuit in
April 2018 after a series of responses from
both Rodriguez and Elon.
Two years after the original lawsuit was
filed, Rodriguez appealed his case on Oct.
30,2018.
On Nov. 30, U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Fourth Circuit agreed with the district
court’s conclusion of no evidence of dis
crimination, according the the court opin-
The decision says that previously, Elon
argued correctly in that it originally rec
ommended Rodriguez for tenure, which
negated any discrimination claim.
Originally, Rodriguez argued that the
white faculty member hired to replace him
as Director of Chandler Family Professional
Sales Center was less qualified than he was.
The Chandler Family Professional Sales
Center in the Love School of Business
promotes professional selling and man
agement techniques to students and sales
executives.
The court said that this was not dis
crimination because the faculty member
that received the promotion “was not a
non-tenure-track professor and thus does
not qualify as an adequate comparator.”
Rodriguez was recommended for ten
ure by his department chair, but ultimately
it was denied. He was then offered a one-
year, non-renewable contract before re
signing, proving Elon “did not intend” for
Rodriguez to resign.
According to the court opinion, Ro-
Elon University won a case against a
former custodian after he failed to prove
he was passed up for a promotion and ter
minated because of racial discrimination.
Teofilo Matias is Hispanic and a natu
ralized U.S. citizen. He was employed by
Elon University for 17 years as a custodian
before being fired in February 2016 fol
lowing a sexual harassment investigation,
according to the original lawsuit filed back
in May 2017.
On Monday, Nov. 26, a U.S. District
Court for the Middle District of North
Carolina ruled that Matias was unable to
prove “his qualifications were demonstra
bly superior” to the man they ended up
hiring, according to the lawsuit.
Matias also argued a fellow employee
had “been accused of sexual harassment
multiple times by different employees on
different occasions,” and remained on the
job while Matias was let go “under appar
ently similar circumstances.”
Human Resource investigations found
the employee never violated Elon Universi
ty’s code of conduct. This compares to the
HR investigation against Matias and found
he “created a hostile work environment
for [his coworker],” according to the court
opinion. Thus, the court found these two
incidences not “similarly situated.”
According to court opinion, Matias was
also unable to prove discrimination was
a reason for his termination, but failed to
show “evidence of conduct or statements
that both reflect directly the alleged dis
criminatory attitude and that bear directly
on the consented employment decision.”
Alex Simon, Margaret Malone, Anton L.
Delgado, Grace Morris and Jack Norcross
contributed reporting.
MATIAS V. ELON
UNIVERSITY
matias files a lawsuit
YEARS OF SERVICE
Matias filed a lawsuit claiming
he was wrongfully fired and
passed over for pro-
n^otion because of
his ethnicity and because
the information used to fire him
was fabricated. This came after his Feb
ruary 2016 termination, which resulted
from a sexual harassment investigation,
marking the end of his 17 years as a cus
todian at Elon University.
years Matias worked as a
custodian for Elon before
being terminated.
COURT RULES IN FAVOR OF
THE UNIVERSITY
The U.S. District Court for the
Middle District of North Carolina
ruled in favor of Elon University.
The court said Matias was
unable to prove he was more
qualified than the new hire
in response to Matias
claims that he
was passed
over for the su
pervisor of support
services position in 2014
and had to then train the young
I white male that was hired instead,
i The court also added that Matias
I was unable to prove that racial dis-
! crimination was a reason for his
termination.
RODRIGUEZ V. ELON
UNIVERSITY
ALAMANCE COUNTY SUPERIOR
COURT LAWSUIT FILED
Michael Rodriguez
ELON DENIES DISCRIMINATION
ALLEGATIONS
Elon University denied all of
Rodriguez’s discrimina
tion claims and re
quested that the case
be dismissed because aa
claim with the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission within the
statute of limitations. The university
said Rodriguez’s faculty director role
expired at the end of May 2015 and that
he refused a standard one-year letter of
agreement for the next academic year.
Rodriguez filed
a lawsuit in Ala
mance County Superior
Court, claiming he was racially
discriminated against while work
ing at Elon University. He sought more
than $25,000 in damages, court costs and
attorney fees. The lawsuit stated that Elon
removed Rodriguez from his role as facul
ty director of the Chandler Family Profes
sional Sales Center, reduced his compen
sation and offered him a terminal contract.
Rodriguez alleged that he did not receive
a similar salary increase as his white peers
did. He also claimed he was told by Elon
senior administrators to not “rock the
boat” by reporting the discrimina
tion while he applied for tenure.
Rodriguez was denied tenure in
February 2015.
RODRIGUEZ FILES
DECLARATIONS AND EXHIBITS
ELON FILES REPLY TO
RODRIGUEZ’S DECLARATIONS
AND EXHIBITS
Elon University filed a 15-]
reply to Rodriguez’s 2,270-
page response. In
the document,
Elon countered many
of the main points Rodriguez
made in his response, including the
affidavits from former colleagues and
students claiming he was more than
qualified for tenure. The university
concluded its reply by restating its
original request to dismiss Rodriguez’s
claims and by adding a new request to
disregard certain sections of one of
Rodriguez’s affidavits.
Rodriguez filed 2,270 pages’ worth
of declarations and exhibits in re
sponse to Elon’s motion to dis
miss his case. Included
were declara
tions from for
mer colleagues and
students who had worked
closely with Rodriguez, and each
declaration praised Rodriguez’s qual
ifications for promotion and tenure.
Rodriguez’s response also included
two evaluations from the promotions
and tenure committee - one voting
5-3 in favor, another voting 2-6 against
tenure and promotion and 3-5 against
tenure only. In an affidavit, a written
statement for use as evidence in
court, Provost and Vice Pres
ident of Student Life Steven
House said he “received ‘no’
recommendations from both
the [Promotions and Tenure]
Committee and the appropriate
dean, Raghu Tadepalli.”
RODRIGUEZ APPEALS
Rodriguez appealed his
case after losing the
original lawsuit in
April 2018.
CDURT RULES IN FAVOR OF
THE UNIVERSITY
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Fourth Circuit ruled in favor of Elon
University, agreeing with the district
court’s conclusion of no evidence of
discrimination. The court opinion said
that Elon previously argued correctly
that it originally recommended Ro
driguez for tenure, which negated
any discrimination claim.
In response to Rodri
guez’s argument
that the white fac
ulty member hired to fill
his faculty director role was less
qualified than him, the court said this
was not discrimination because the
faculty member “was not a non-ten
ure-track professor and thus does not
qualify as an adequate comparator.”
IN DAMAGES
$25,000
is the amount of monetary
compensation Matias sought in
damages.