Question: Daniels v. WorldCom Corp. 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2335 (N.D. Tex. 1998)

Employees sued the employer under Title VII and state civil causes of action when jokes with racial undertones were sent to them and other employees on their workplace computers. While the court dismissed the actions based on legal problems with the case, the case is instructive for demonstrating how racial harassment can arise in the workplace, and even changes with technology

Solis, J.

Angela Daniels and Dimple Ballou allege that they were racially discriminated against while working at WorldCom, Inc. Specifically, they assert that four electronic mail [e-mail] jokes sent by a non-managerial employee of WorldCom were racially harassing. Further, the employees assert that WorldCom was negligent for allowing the e-mail system to be used to send the jokes and that WorldCom retaliated against them for reporting the jokes. On January 21, 1997, Cathy Madzik, a non-managerial employee at WorldCom, sent a joke to Daniels and two other co-workers across the company's e-mail system. After receiving this and construing the joke as having racial undertones, Daniels sent a message to Madzik objecting to the joke's contents.

Three days later, Madzik sent three more jokes to Daniels and others. Daniels was offended by what she perceived as racial undertones in one of the jokes. At some point shortly after receiving these jokes, Daniels complained to the manager of the Information Systems Department, Dianne Summers. Daniels also took her concerns to Tom Adams, the Human Resources Manager at WorldCom's Dallas facility. After learning of Daniels' concerns and discussing the situation with the Human Resources Department, Summers issued a "strong verbal warning" to Madzik and placed a written reprimand in her personnel file.

On or about January 27, 1997, Summers held a staff meeting which Daniels and Ballou attended. At the close of this meeting, Summers dismissed Madzik and warned the remaining individuals not to use the e-mail system for non-business purposes. On January 29, 1997, Adams held a meeting during which Daniels and Ballou were also allowed to voice their displeasure about the jokes. Adams also addressed the appropriate use of the company e-mail system. In addition to the two meetings discussed above, Summers requested several workers at WorldCom, including Daniels and Ballou, to review the company's Electronic Mail Policy.

Daniels and Ballou filed suit on February 27, 1997. Daniels and Ballou assert that WorldCom was negligent in allowing employees to use the e-mail system to send racially discriminatory jokes. To the extent that they claim an allegation of common-law negligence, this claim fails as a matter of law because WorldCom acted reasonably. Within ten days of the employees' complaints regarding the e-mail jokes, supervisors at WorldCom organized two meetings to discuss the proper use of the company's e-mail system. Further, Summers verbally reprimanded Madzik and issued a written warning regarding improper use of e-mail. Finally, WorldCom had an established policy regarding the use of e-mail and Summers attached a copy of this policy on February 4, 1997, for the employees in her department to review. Based on all of this evidence, WorldCom acted reasonably and employees' common-law claim of negligence fails as a matter of law. Employer's motion to dismiss is GRANTED.

1. Does it surprise you that there would be liability on the part of the employer for harassing e-mails sent from a workplace computer? Explain.

2. Do you agree with the court that the employer quickly and appropriately addressed the problem here so that liability should not attach?

3. If you were the manager to whom the employees came reporting the e-mail jokes, what would you have done?