PHILADELPHIA – A federal court has rejected the claims of a Black SEPTA bus driver who says he was racially discriminated against, when he was terminated after striking a pedestrian on the job.
A Nov. 16 ruling by the U.S. Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania dismisses violation of equal protection and due process claims from Keithrollin Thompson, against the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA).
Thompson’s claims were dismissed without prejudice and he will have the opportunity to amend them.
“The Court will grant SEPTA’s motion to dismiss because Thompson fails to properly allege municipal liability against SEPTA and fails to allege he was fired without due process of law,” Judge Juan R. Sanchez said.
“To the extent Thompson alleges SEPTA has a policy of discriminating against non-white bus operators, he has failed to allege conduct by an official SEPTA policymaker. At best, Thompson alleges SEPTA Senior Director Tom Marcucci is a final decision-maker for SEPTA with regards to terminations. However, his allegation is undermined by his other allegations in the second amended complaint.”
Thompson, a SEPTA employee since 1994, was on duty as a bus driver on July 3, 2018, when he struck a pedestrian at the corner of 32nd and Tasker Streets in Philadelphia. The pedestrian refused medical treatment and left the scene, and the incident was captured on video.
After an investigation, Thompson was fired in August 2018. He claims a SEPTA senior transportation director showed racial bias towards him in evaluating his case, that white drivers involved in similar incidents to his were not terminated and that his termination was upheld, despite little to no supporting evidence.
Thompson filed his case in February alleging violation of equal protection and due process claims, and SEPTA moved to dismiss it in May. A first amended version was filed by Thompson in April, followed by a second version in May and was moved to be dismissed by SEPTA in June.
“Thompson’s due process claim will be dismissed because he failed to allege SEPTA’s grievance and arbitration procedure provided insufficient due process. The Third Circuit has held SEPTA’s three-step grievance and arbitration procedure is adequate for due process purposes,” Sanchez said.
The three-step process was: (1) An informal hearing in which a grievant is made aware of the charges against him and recommended discipline, (2) A formal hearing in which evidence is presented and discipline is imposed, and (3) A de novo hearing before the Labor Relations Manager.
Furthermore, as Thompson did not show that a policy, custom, practice, or that the individual responsible for his termination established the final policy for SEPTA, the second amended complaint’s factual allegations are insufficient to allege municipal liability against SEPTA, Sanchez ruled.
Sanchez dismissed the equal protection and due process violation claims without prejudice, as Thompson was granted leave to file an amended complaint to cure the deficiencies.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:20-cv-00756
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com