Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, DISCRIMINATION—RACE—S.D.N.Y.: Special ed teacher, fired when new principal took over, advances bias claims, (Jul 23, 2025)

By Todd Harrison, J.D.

Despite the new principal’s stated intent to reduce staff, the plaintiff—the school’s only African-American teacher at the time—was the only employee to be let go.

A former special education teacher can move forward with his Section 1981, Title VII, and NYSHRL race discrimination claims asserted against his former employer and principal of the school where he taught, ruled a federal district court in New York. The teacher, an African-American man, had received positive evaluations prior to the new principal taking over, at which point his evaluations began to suffer. He was terminated, purportedly for tardiness and absenteeism issues, but he never took off more days than he had accrued and no record was kept of his actual arrival times. As such, a jury could find that these proffered reasons were pretextual (Johnson v. Rockland County BOCES, No. 21 CV 3375 (VB) (S.D.N.Y. July 21, 2025)).

The plaintiff, an African-American man, was employed as a special education social studies teacher at Rockland County Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) CBI Tech High School from November 2017 until June 2020.

Positive evaluations. In 2018 and 2019, the then principal of the school conducted both announced and unannounced classroom evaluations. The teacher received ratings of “effective” and “highly effective.” The evaluations also referenced the teacher’s punctuality and attendance, with the principal documenting several days on which the teacher was up to seven minutes late, along with details of the exact dates and times of his arrivals. The teacher was told to improve his record in this area lest he receive a formal write-up. The principal never formally disciplined the teacher for any tardiness issues.

Negative evaluation. On July 1, 2019, a new principal took over at the school. During his tenure, he also conducted evaluations of the staff. In one evaluation from January 2020, he rated the teacher as “developing.”

Counseling memos. Two counseling memos were issued to the teacher in March 2020. One concerned his tardiness and the other concerned his attendance record. In the tardiness memo, the principal stated that he had observed the teacher arrive late to school on four days in January and February and that this situation could not continue. The attendance memo addressed the teacher’s “chronic absenteeism record,” providing a chart detailing the number of days the teacher had taken off for sick, personal, family illness, and bereavement leave dating back to 2018. However, at no point did the teacher use more days than what he had accrued.

Termination. On March 31, the principal informed the faculty that there would be a reduction in staff “as BOCES is ultimately a business.” On April 3, the executive director of HR informed the teacher that he was going to be recommended for termination effective June 30. The letter did not identify any reasons for this decision. However, in a phone call with the executive director that same day, she allegedly told the teacher he was being let go for absenteeism and lateness issues. She also said the teacher was not the right “fit” for the school.

Replacement. It was undisputed that no other faculty members were terminated as part of the reduction in staff discussed by the principal. At the time of the teacher’s termination, there were no other African-American teachers working at the school. Soon after his termination, a white man was hired to replace him. Subsequently, the teacher filed this lawsuit.

Qualified. Applying the McDonnell Douglas framework to the teacher’s prima facie case, the defendants first argued that the teacher could not establish that he was qualified for his role. The court did not agree.

A reasonable jury could find the teacher was qualified for his job given his 30 years of teaching experience and the fact that he possesses a bachelor’s and master’s degree in education and administration, observed the court. Further, prior to the new principal taking over, he was rated as “effective” or “highly effective” in every evaluation category.

Inference of discrimination. As to the defendants’ argument that the teacher’s termination and subsequent replacement could not give rise to an inference of discrimination, the court was again unmoved.

Despite an allegedly impending reduction in force, presumably intended to reduce costs, the defendants terminated only one employee—an African-American man—and soon thereafter replaced him with a white man. A reasonable jury could find that these actions give rise to an inference of discrimination, said the court.

Legitimate reasons. Having established his prima facie case, the burden shifted to the defendants to show a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for its decision. Here, the defendants pointed to the teacher’s allegedly poor attendance record, tardiness, and poor performance.

Attendance record. Shifting the burden back to the teacher to show that these reasons were pretextual, the court noted that the defendants’ proffered reasons for its decision were supported by “extremely thin evidence.” For example, the teacher availed himself of time off he had accrued in 2018, 2019, and 2020, but never exceeded the number of accrued days in each category. Thus, a reasonable jury could discount the defendants’ argument that the teacher’s use of his accrued days demonstrated a chronic and persistent issue and conclude that the reliance on his attendance record was pretext for discriminatory termination, said the court.

The same could be said for the teacher’s alleged tardiness, continued the court. Although the record reflected that he arrived late on several occasions, as documented by the former principal, she never felt the need to take formal disciplinary action against the teacher. This changed when the new principal took over. However, he never kept a record of the teacher’s purportedly late arrival times.

To illustrate the importance of the teacher’s timely arrival to work, the principal contended that on March 19, 2019, a student was stabbed by another student with a pair of scissors. However, there was no evidence that the teacher had any involvement with this incident. The fact that the incident had no apparent relation to the teacher “could provide a further basis for a reasonable jury to find pretext,” said the court.

Poor performance. As to the defendants’ assertion that the teacher was also fired for poor performance, a jury could again find this reason to be pretextual. It was undisputed that the teacher received consistent, positive feedback from the previous principal. However, within a few months of the new principal taking over, the teacher was rated as “developing” on his evaluations, evaluations that were used shortly thereafter to justify the termination decision.

By pointing to the previous principal’s classroom evaluations that he performed his duties in a satisfactory manner, the teacher could make an adequate showing that the defendants’ proffered reason was unworthy of credence.

Shifting justifications. A reasonable jury could also find that the shifting justifications for the teacher’s termination evinced pretext. For example, when the executive director of HR spoke with the teacher over the phone, she informed him he was being terminated for lateness and absenteeism. However, these reasons were never formally documented. Moreover, according to the teacher, he was also told during this conversation that he was being terminated because he was not the right “fit” for the school. Accordingly, a reasonable jury could conclude that these multiple reasons given for the termination decision were pretextual. As such, the defendants’ motion for summary judgment against the race discrimination claims was denied.

The case is No. 21 CV 3375 (VB).

Judge: Briccetti, V.

Attorneys: Antoinette L. Williams (Law Office of Antoinette L. Williams) for Pedro M. Johnson. Barbara M. Maisto (Bond Schoeneck & King) for Rockland County BOCES.

Companies: Rockland County BOCES

Cases: Discrimination RaceDiscrimination Discharge PublicEmployees NewYorkNews