For the legal eagles who are familiar with Title 7:

A Republican acquaintance tried to provoke me with this anecdote that he probably acquired from Rush Limbaugh and, if true, the question that came to mind is why is our side giving these idiots ammunition to throw back at us?

What he told me is that a black employee filed a discrimination lawsuit because s/he felt s/he was discriminated against because s/he kept her/his job, but a white employee was offered a severance package. The package, apparently, was hefty. The case was thrown out and is now, apparently, fodder for the right-wing media.

The three questions that came to mind are:

(1) What lawyer, in his right mind, would advise his client to file this baseless lawsuit?

(2) If true, shouldn't minorities think about how these kinds of lawsuits reflect badly on the rest of us?

and

(3) Has anyone heard about this case enough to provide more illumination as to why this even got off the ground floor?

This definitely sounds like a Rush legal snippet without enough facts to argue the other side. I did a quick google search of "black white severance employment" and the majority of the cases I saw were situations where white employees received larger severance packages or where blacks received larger packages, but had to sign away their Title VII rights too.

One possibility is that it was clear the company was going bankrupt so they fired all the white employees and gave them severance pay and kept black employees. Then, bankruptcy was filed and the black employees lost their jobs without the possibility of severance.

Or, the white employee might have been offered a severance package and a buy-out to retire early. The black employee would have kept their job, but will have to retire later and won't get the added money when s/he does.

Last thought, maybe the severance package was huge (more like a golden parachute) and it really was financially advantageous to be a white employee and be fired, rather a black employee who kept working.

I wish I knew this case and I hope someone else responds with some real insights. Personally, I think it's right wing propaganda with only a few facts being told.

I had a hunch that there was more to it, but without a case name (and you know this guy won't have a case name) I'm pretty much dead in the water. However, I hadn't realized there were viable issues regarding severance pay, and in this day and age where bankruptcy is a potential problem, it could be just another way to insure that whites will ride out these troubled economic times, better than minorities will.

I'm really surprised this acquaintaince even brought it up. It sounds like such a hostile topic for two people who are just getting to know each other.

when it is told, this stupid old woman puts a hot cup of coffee between her legs to steady it while she's driving and gets a bad burn.

But in reality, McDonalds kept its coffee hotter than allowed so they can save money because they had to throw away less. They had calculated how much money they would save vs how much money they would have to pay to people who were burned! Many people had been injured on McDonald's too hot coffee, including little kids who and pulled cups of coffee off the counter on top of their heads.

The jury awarded the plaintif 2 days profit from McDonald's coffee. Which happens to be $7 mill. Sound so outrageous now?

I never believe those stories.