PHILADELPHIA - The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Aug. 1 ruled against a male bartender who said he was fired because of sex discrimination.
The court granted the defendants, Tonelli’s Pizza Pub and its owner Randa Enterprises Inc., their motion for summary judgment in Michael Goodrich’s complaint against them. Goodrich claimed Tonelli’s and Randa violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Pennsylvania Human Rights Act when he was terminated as a bartender and replaced with a woman.
Goodrich had worked as a full-time bartender for Tonelli’s from May 2012 to June 29, 2015. He was fired via voicemail as the general manager Larry Barksdale told him the bar was “going in a different direction,” according to the lawsuit. Before the voicemail, Goodrich was dismissed earlier in the day for having a “bad attitude” and “difficulties with the staff,” court documents said. At one point, he had an argument with Barksdale and told Barksdale to terminate him.
The defendants said the firing was “the last straw” after a series of bad behavior from Goodrich, but the former bartender said he never received a written warning. When he applied for unemployment benefits, he indicated he was let go because of “insubordination” on his application because “he had nothing to put down,” he said.
About a week after his firing, he said he got a text message from a woman named Jena Marshall, who worked his former shifts. He went on to interview for other bartender positions. Interviewers told him they reached out to Tonelli’s for a reference, and Tonelli’s said it was changing the setup and no longer wanted men. Goodrich then filed the lawsuit.
The court ruled Goodrich didn’t show prima facie, causing the court to grant summary judgment for the defendants. The court said his claims that a woman took over his shifts a week after he was fired isn’t enough.
“Plaintiff’s evidence that [a female coworker] took over his shifts is weak, stemming from a single text from [the coworker] that he received one week after his termination and was unable to produce,” the court said.
In addition, the court said, that the female worker fill in for his shifts doesn’t mean she actually replaced him. Goodrich said he wasn’t sure if he was directly replaced or if existing coworkers took over his shifts, the court said.
Goodrich also failed to prove he was fired for a reason other than what the defendants described as a “bad attitude,” the court said.
Judge Jan E. DuBois ruled on the case.