Racial Discrimination as a Cause of Action in New York Under the NYSHRL

Racial discrimination as a cause of action in New York under the NYSHRL allows an employee to challenge a harmful workplace decision that was allegedly based on race rather than ability, performance, or other lawful reasons. In practical terms, this means an employer cannot lawfully fire, demote, reduce pay, deny promotion, or otherwise disadvantage someone because of race. This cause of action applies when a plaintiff can show protected status, competence to perform the job, a materially adverse employment action, and circumstances suggesting that race played a role in the employer’s decision.

Member of a Protected Class

The first element requires the plaintiff to show that she is a member of a protected class. In this context, that means the plaintiff must show that the alleged discrimination was tied to race, which New York law protects.

This element matters because the NYSHRL does not address every kind of workplace unfairness. Instead, it prohibits discrimination tied to specific protected characteristics. Race is one of those characteristics. Without protected status, there is no racial discrimination cause of action under this framework.

Competent to Perform the Job or Performing the Job Duties Satisfactorily

The second element requires the plaintiff to show that she was competent to perform the job in question, or was performing the job duties satisfactorily. This does not mean the employee must prove flawless work or show that the employer never had any concerns. The question is whether the employee was able to do the job at an acceptable level.

This requirement matters because racial discrimination as a cause of action in New York under the NYSHRL is not meant to block employers from making lawful decisions based on actual job problems. If the plaintiff was qualified, experienced, and doing the job satisfactorily, it becomes more plausible that the employer’s action may have been based on discrimination rather than poor performance.

Suffered a Materially Adverse Employment Action or Was Terminated

The third element is that the plaintiff suffered a materially adverse employment action or was terminated from employment. In plain language, this means the employer took some serious negative action affecting the plaintiff’s job.

Termination is the clearest example, but it is not the only one. Other materially adverse actions can include demotion, suspension, denial of promotion, reduced pay, or another meaningful change in the terms and conditions of employment. Minor annoyances, routine conflict, or ordinary workplace tension generally are not enough by themselves.

This element is central to racial discrimination as a cause of action in New York under the NYSHRL because the law focuses on real workplace harm. The plaintiff must point to a specific employment action that caused damage. Without that, the case lacks the concrete event needed for the discrimination analysis.

Circumstances That Gave Rise to an Inference of Discrimination

The fourth element requires the plaintiff to show that the action occurred under circumstances that gave rise to an inference of discrimination. This is often the most contested part of the case because it asks whether the surrounding facts suggest that race may have played a role in the employer’s decision.

An inference of discrimination can arise in different ways. It may come from racially charged comments, different treatment of similarly situated employees, suspicious timing, inconsistent explanations, or a broader pattern of unfavorable treatment toward workers of a certain race. What matters is whether the facts, taken together, support a reasonable conclusion that discrimination may have been involved.

Conclusion

Racial discrimination as a cause of action in New York under the NYSHRL gives employees a legal framework for challenging workplace decisions allegedly based on race rather than merit or lawful business reasons. To establish this cause of action, a plaintiff must show membership in a protected class, competence to perform the job or satisfactory job performance, a materially adverse employment action or termination, and circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination. These elements help courts distinguish unlawful discrimination from workplace problems that may be frustrating or unfair but do not violate the law.

FindLaw

“A plaintiff alleging racial or gender discrimination under the NYSHRL has the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of discrimination. To meet her prima facie burden, plaintiff must show that: (1) she is a member of a protected class; (2) she was competent to perform the job in question, or was performing the job duties satisfactorily; (3) she suffered a materially adverse employment action or was terminated from employment; and (4) the action occurred under circumstances that gave rise to an inference of discrimination (See, Forrest v Jewish Guild for the Blind,3 N.Y.3d 295, 305 [2004]; Torre v Charter Communications, Inc.,493 F.Supp.3d 276, 285 [SD NY 2020]).” Jaiteh v. Whole Foods Mkt. Grp., 2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 31915, at 6 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2022).