Search form

Employee Cannot Bypass Title VII, ADA Regulatory Schemes to Hold Public Employers Personally Liable, Third Circuit Rules

By Marla N. Presley and Jenna M. Decker
  • September 1, 2017

Plaintiff-employees cannot pursue a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Section 1983) for rights created under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, the federal appeals court in Philadelphia has held in a case of first impression for the Third Circuit. Williams v. Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, et al., No. 16-4383 (3d Cir. Aug. 30, 2017). The Court joins seven other circuits to have considered the issue and came to the same conclusion.

After exhausting her administrative remedies, the plaintiff, Cheryl Williams, filed suit against her former employer, the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, alleging discrimination on the basis of her race and disability. Because no individual liability exists under Title VII or the ADA, Williams relied on Section 1983 to bring claims against her two supervisors in their individual capacities as “state actors.” The Western District of Pennsylvania granted the PHRC’s motion for summary judgment, finding Title VII and the ADA do not create individually enforceable rights under Section 1983. Williams appealed to the Third Circuit and the Third Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the defendants.

Title VII and the ADA have comprehensive regulatory schemes that include pre-lawsuit requirements, discreet filing deadlines, and limited liability for individual actors, the Third Circuit explained. Section 1983 contains no such administrative scheme. Instead, Section 1983 allows plaintiffs to proceed directly in court.

The court found that allowing Title VII or ADA claims to be brought as Section 1983 claims would “thwart Congress’s carefully crafted administrative scheme by throwing open a back door to the federal courthouse when the front door is purposefully fortified.” Thus, plaintiffs seeking to recover for workplace discrimination must use the administrative process outlined in the antidiscrimination statutes and cannot bypass those requirements through Section 1983.

Jackson Lewis attorneys are available to answer inquiries regarding this case and other workplace developments.

©2017 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

October 30, 2017

Chicago Adopts ‘Hands Off Pants On’ Law to Protect Hotel Workers from Sexual Harassment, Assault

October 30, 2017

To provide hospitality workers greater protections against sexual harassment and assault, the Chicago City Council passed the “Hands Off Pants On” Ordinance on October 11, 2017. The Ordinance requires all hotels in the City to adopt a panic button system and an anti-sexual harassment policy. The Ordinance was passed after months of... Read More

October 24, 2017

California Adds ‘Transgender,’ ‘Gender Nonconforming Individuals’ to Sexual Harassment Prevention Training for Supervisors

October 24, 2017

Employers subject to California’s mandatory sexual harassment training requirement for supervisors will need to ensure their programs include prevention of harassment based on gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation following an amendment (SB 396) to California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). On October 15... Read More

October 5, 2017

Department of Justice Releases Memorandum Restricting Transgender Worker Protection under Title VII

October 5, 2017

On October 4, 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions reversed the Department of Justice’s position that gender identity is protected as part of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act’s prohibition against sex discrimination — taking a position that is contrary to current guidance from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. In a... Read More

Related Practices