FindLaw |

Legal News & Information

White News Anchor Let Go for Performance, Not Color

A white television news anchor who was replaced by a black man failed to show that he was let go based on his race rather than the fact that his on-air "style" did not meet management's expectations, a California appeals court has ruled.

The court said the TV station produced evidence to show that its refusal to negotiate a new contract for plaintiff Brad Hicks was unrelated to his race.

Although the station admitted that it used subjective criteria in deciding that Hicks should be replaced, an assessment based on such criteria does not necessarily demonstrate that the reason is a pretext for discrimination, the court said.

Hicks began working for KNTV in the San Francisco Bay Area in 2000. While he was anchoring the 5:30 p.m. and 10 p.m. weeknight news broadcasts, the station became an NBC affiliate.

NBC's purchase of KNTV led to a number of changes in the station's top management, and James Sanders became vice president of news, according to the opinion.

Eight months later Sanders decided not to renew Hicks' contract because he found the anchor's on-air style "aloof, distant, standoffish, unapproachable, stiff and too anchor-like," the opinion says.

KNTV needed an anchor who was "warm, approachable, credible [and] welcoming," Sanders allegedly said. He rejected Hicks' request to remain at the station as a reporter, saying such a move "doesn't work," according to the opinion,

After considering about 100 applicants, Sanders hired T.J. Holmes, a black man, to replace Hicks.

Hicks sued KNTV and NBC in the Santa Clara County Superior Court, alleging race discrimination and wrongful termination in violation of the state fair-employment law.

The court granted summary judgment to the defendants, saying they had produced evidence of a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for refusing to negotiate a new contract with Hicks.

Also, Hicks failed to raise a reasonable inference that the nondiscriminatory reason was a pretext for unlawful discrimination, the court said.

On appeal, the 6th District Court of Appeal held that KNTV's stated reason for not renewing Hicks' contract - that his performance was "not good enough for a television station in the fifth largest market in the country" - was legitimate under the circumstances.

Next, the appeals court said there was no evidence of unlawful discrimination.

It rejected Hicks' argument that he was objectively more qualified than Holmes, noting that such information was not relevant to the case because KNTV did not cite objective qualifications as its reason for letting Hicks go.

Further, the court said there was "nothing inherently suspect" in the use of subjective criteria.

"Absent some evidence that the station made its decisions based on race, the mere use of subjective criteria does not permit us to second-guess the employer's business judgment," it said.

There also was no evidence to support Hicks' contention that Sanders' pattern of hiring minorities to replace white anchors demonstrated that his personnel decisions were race-based, according to the court.

Although Sanders replaced every white anchor who left the station with a minority, the court refused to draw the inference Hicks urged.

"Simply failing to replace white employees with other white employees is not evidence of racial discrimination," it said.

Finally, the court determined that Hicks had not shown that the defendants lied about their reason for refusing to negotiate a new contract with him.

Although Hicks may have received compliments for various newscasts and his reporting skills in general, there was no evidence to contradict Sanders' conclusion that his anchoring style was "aloof, distant or unapproachable," the court said.

To comment, ask questions or contribute articles, contact West.Andrews.Editor@Thomson.com.