Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, DISCRIMINATION—RACE—E.D. La.: African-American refinery worker could not establish HWE despite ‘Coming to America’ meme, (Apr 30, 2026)

By Jason Albright, J.D.

Two coworkers videorecorded a chair spinning with the meme posted on it and the film’s song “Soul Glo” playing in the background.

An African-American refinery worker for ExxonMobil, who resigned after coworkers circulated a meme of his face transposed on a picture from the film Coming to America and videorecorded a chair spinning with a copy of the meme and the film’s song “Soul Glo” playing in the background, failed to establish a racially hostile work environment under Title VII, a federal district court in Louisiana found. Observing that the plaintiff testified that in the eight years he worked at the company he experienced no other such incidents, the incident was not physically threatening to him, it did not unreasonably interfere with his work performance, and he did not indicate that he left his employment because of it, the court found the alleged conduct insufficiently severe or pervasive to support the claim (Norman v. ExxonMobil Corp., No. 23-00330-BAJ-EWD (M.D. La. Apr. 28, 2026)).

Assistant operator. In 2014, according to the court, the plaintiff, an African-American man, began working as an assistant operator at ExxonMobil’s Baton Rouge Refinery Hydroprocessing and Hydrocracking Unit.

April 2022 incident. On April 17, 2022, a coworker who is also an African-American man allegedly “teased” him about grease stains from the plaintiff’s hair products that appeared on his chair. The operator, in turn, teased the coworker for being bald.

Meme. Then the coworker created a meme of the plaintiff using a picture from the film Coming to America, specifically of the film’s character “Darryl Jenks,” along with the movie phrase “Let Your Soul Glow,” and a photo of the plaintiff’s face transposed on it.

Chair video. He showed the meme to another coworker, who is white, and one or both of the coworkers then posted several copies of it throughout the area, taped one copy and an oil pad to a chair in the unit’s control room, and then videorecorded the chair spinning with the film’s song “Soul Glo” playing in the background. Notably, the plaintiff had never heard the white coworker say or do anything racially derogatory, according to the court.

Discarded. When the plaintiff arrived at work, he discarded the memes and the oil pad. Only four employees were working in the area at the time, very few coworkers discussed the incident with him, and those discussions were limited to that day.

Complained to shift leader, who disciplined coworkers. He complained to a shift leader, who told him he would “take care of it,” and later that day the shift leader and another shift leader convened the entire workgroup and instructed them that the memes must stop. And although the first shift leader addressed the entire group, he looked directly at the two coworkers who created the video and considered it to be a “coaching and counseling” for them, which is the first step of the employer’s discipline procedure.

Conduct stopped. After that discussion, the posting of memes in the unit stopped. The plaintiff did not hear anything further about the meme after that day, never again saw any copies of the meme circulated or posted at work, and did not see or hear of new memes of himself being posted or distributed.

Resignation almost six months later. He continued his employment with ExxonMobil for almost six months thereafter without issue and then gave two-weeks’ notice of his resignation on October 3, 2022, citing as his reason his feeling that there was little room for growth at the company. He did mention the April 2022 incident to a unit lead at the time of his resignation.

NAACP call and investigation. The next day, the employer received a call from the NAACP, which had received a complaint about the April 2022 incident from the plaintiff. ExxonMobil initiated an investigation of the incident the same day, interviewed the coworkers and managers involved, and concluded that the two coworkers violated its Harassment in the Workplace policy.

Based on the overall context, however, including that jokes and memes were common among this workgroup, “with employees of both races being subjects,” according to the court, ExxonMobil’s investigation team did not find the harassment race based.

Coworkers received written discipline. In late October, the two coworkers involved received written discipline.

No other incidents. The former refinery worker did not allege additional incidents of racial harassment either before or after the April 2022 incident. He never filed a union grievance, and he never complained to any manager, supervisor, or HR about discrimination or harassment based on his race. “The culture in the unit,” according to the court, “was such that the employees frequently joked with each other….”

ExxonMobil’s policies. In addition, the court noted, ExxonMobil’s policy prohibits discrimination and harassment based on race and other protected characteristics, as well as retaliation for making complaints or participating in investigations. Pursuant to the same policy, all complaints or concerns about such conduct “should be brought to” the attention of management or HR “so that appropriate corrective steps can be taken.”

Lawsuit. In May 2023, the former refinery worker sued ExxonMobil, alleging violations of the Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments; Sections 1983, 1985, and 1986; Title VII; and Louisiana law. The court dismissed all but his Title VII claim and a claim under La. R.S. § 23:332 concerning alleged hairstyle discrimination.

ExxonMobil then moved for summary judgment against the Title VII claim and the state-law claim to the extent that it remained pending.

HWE. The court first found that summary judgment against the Title VII racially hostile work environment (HWE) claim was appropriate. The court noted that the former refinery worker testified that in the eight years he worked at the company he experienced no other such incidents. In addition, the incident was not physically threatening to him, it did not unreasonably interfere with his work performance, and he “did not indicate that he left his employment” with ExxonMobil because of it, according to the court. The alleged conduct was accordingly insufficiently severe or pervasive to support a HWE claim under Title VII.

State-law hairstyle claim. His claim under La. R.S. § 23:332 concerning alleged hairstyle discrimination fared similarly. Here, the court noted that it previously gave the plaintiff an opportunity to amend his complaint to state facts supporting the claim, he did not amend his complaint accordingly, and his opposition brief did not discuss the Section 23:332 claim at all.

The case is No. 23-00330-BAJ-EWD.

Judge: Jackson, B.

Attorneys: Charles Edward Brumfield, Jr. (Law Offices of Charles E. Brumfield, Jr.) for Christopher Norman. Scott D. Huffstetler (Kean Miller) for ExxonMobil Corp. dba ExxonMobil Chemical Corp.

Companies: ExxonMobil Corp.; ExxonMobil Chemical Corp.

Cases: RaceDiscrimination Discrimination LouisianaNews