In regard to Democratic Mayoral Candidate, Joseph Paul, some background information

In regard to Democratic Mayoral Candidate, Joseph Paul, some background information. First of all there are four words that are important to understand in the context of Mr. Paul’s law suit against the Bank of America. One is affirmative action and the other is summary judgment. Affirmative action was a plan to offset past discrimination in employment or education against woman and African Americans. A summary judgment is a court order, ruling that no factual issues remain to be tried and therefore a cause of action or all causes of action in a complaint can be decided, by a judge, upon certain facts without a trial. The theory behind summary judgment process is to cut down on unnecessary litigation by eliminating, without trial, one or more causes of action in the complaint.

Mr. Paul filed suit against Bank of America charging racial discrimination and age discrimination by Bank of America which violated affirmative action requirements by terminating his employment at Bank of America. Mr. Paul stated “It was race (under affirmative action) that got me overpaid for that position.” Bank of America stated the following: “Mr. Paul’s attitude and approach were not conducive to success.” Mr. Paul’s supervisor, Ms. Scoplianos, met with Paul to discuss his progress and told him she would like to see him improve in three areas: 1) taking ownership of his role as a team leader, 2) accountability for his team’s performance, and 3) inspiring his team in e-mails and communications.” She also stated “Mr. Paul was not prepared for a business discussion and did not have background information on the client readily available”.

The court stated “There is no evidence in the record of a hostile work environment based on race or age”. The case did not go to jury because it was thrown out of court (on summary judgment).  The court also stated that “Bank of America has met its burden of production to proffer a legitimate, non- discriminatory reason for terminating Plaintiff’s employment.” Mr. Paul appealed this judgment 2 more times and was again found to not have a case.

Mr. Paul then stated, “It was race that got me in a situation where I would need additional training wasn’t addressed. So yeah, race and age now, because I’m at the end of my career, is totally what’s got me in this position.” So which is it Mr. Paul, affirmative action got you a job which it seems you were not qualified to fill or affirmative action which put you in a position where you were meant to fail? You can’t have it both ways sir. My guess is, Bank of America decided to make Mr. Paul an offer he could not refuse so he would just go away. I would not consider that a victory for Mr. Paul. It also brings into question a lot regarding Mr. Paul’s character.

M. H. Griffin