• by Ray Schultz , Columnist, August 22, 2024

A federal judge has handed Gannett a victory in a class-action bias case, dismissing claims that the company discriminated against white employees with its diversity initiative.  

This issue is not unique to publishing, but here is a case where a publisher was sued when it thought it was doing good. 

The plaintiffs have been given 30 days to file any new amended complaint. 

They had charged that persons of Asian, Hispanic American Indian and Black or African ancestry, and members of other groups, received preference over white employees at Gannett publications in New York State. 

One basis for this belief was Gannett’s 2020 Inclusion Report, which the court inferred constitutes the actual policy, although this is not clear. 

U.S. District Judge Rossie D. Alston writes, “To the extent that the 2020 Inclusion Report is the Policy, courts have recognized that ‘the mere existence of a diversity policy, without more,’  is insufficient to make out a prima facie case of discrimination.”

Alston continues, “The 2020 Inclusion Report is vague and aspirational as to Defendant’s goals and does not: (i) define specific quotas for any specific position or the workforce overall; (ii) refer to any caste system designating a hierarchical preference for certain racial groups over others; or (iii) provide specific plans for how its diversity goals are to be achieved.”

The court also dismissed individual claims—for example, that of Steven Bradley who worked on the Democrat and Chronicle, a Gannett paper, from 1999 to 2000 as a content strategist and newsroom leader. 

Bradley claimed that he was informed when being terminated that an employee who was being retained was Asian while he was white. However, he signed a separation agreement and received compensation. 

He also alleged that he was passed over for the open position of executive editor of Gannett’s Mohawk Valley operations, which included the Utica Observer. The job went to a Black woman.

But the judge ruled that while Bradley “subjectively viewed himself as more qualified is not enough to push his claims of discrimination across the line from possible to plausible.”

People who have lost their jobs or are passed over often feel bitter with or without an alleged racial component, but this decision states clearly that you have to do more than simply assert that you were harmed. 

Of course, Gannett is happy with the ruling. 

“We are pleased with the Court’s decision finding that Gannett’s employment decisions concerning the named plaintiffs were not discriminatory,” says Polly Grunfeld Sack, Gannett | USA Today Network chief legal officer. “Gannett always seeks to recruit and retain the most qualified individuals for all roles within the company. We will always vigorously defend our practice of ensuring equal opportunities for all our valued employees."

The case is on file with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division.