Dog Food Case, Part II: $1.6 Million for Reverse Discrimination
More on the infamous “dog-food-in-the-spaghetti-prank-gone-bad” case . . .
Last year, a jury awarded Tennie Pierce, a black L.A. firefighter, $1.43 million for racial harassment. The centerpiece of the allegations was a “prank” in which a co-worker slipped dog food into Pierce’s spaghetti dinner.
Following the incident, the L.A.F.D. promptly suspended two captains, Chris Burton and John Tohill. Burton and Tohill responded by filing their own suit, alleging that they were the victims of reverse discrimination.
The Facts
According to court records and newspaper accounts, here’s what seems to have transpired . . .
In October 2004, Tohill brought a can of dog food to work, intending to give it to Pierce as a “joke trophy” for winning various sports tournaments. Pierce apparently referred to himself as “Big Dog” during the tournaments.
Unbeknownst to Tohill, firefighter Jorge Arevalo spotted the can on the counter and thought it would be funny to put some in Pierce’s spaghetti dinner. Two bites into his meal, Pierce noticed that something tasted strange. When he saw his co-workers were laughing, he asked if someone had put something in his food. No one responded, although Arevalo offered to make him another plate. Pierce stormed out of the room.
His co-workers were surprised by Pierce’s reaction. Apparently, Pierce had a reputation as something of a prankster himself. In fact, just two days earlier he had participated in a prank in which a co-worker was strapped down and doused with A1 sauce. Photos surfaced of other questionable pranks involving Pierce, including one in which he can be seen smearing shaving cream around a co-worker’s groin area and another in which he is laughing at a colleague wrapped in a sheet on which someone had written “Oy Vey! I’m Gay!”
Arevalo apologized to Pierce and offered to eat some of the dog food himself. Pierce declined his invitation.
Pierce says he was then called into a meeting with Burton and Tohill. According to Pierce, they admitted they knew the dog food was on the plate but said that Pierce wasn’t supposed to eat it. Pierce says they apologized. Burton and Tohill say that Pierce demanded that the incident be “kept quiet” and they obliged.
A black co-worker of Pierce’s testified that he and Pierce discussed the incident that night. He says they both concluded that the incident “didn’t have to do with race.” Pierce says he doesn’t recall using those exact words.
The city claimed that the two captains were present when the prank occurred and actively participated in a cover-up. The captains deny acover-up and insist that the city bowed to political pressure and unfairly made them scapegoats. They contend that they took immediate action to address the matter and that the city failed to conduct a fair investigation before suspending them. They also pointed to the fact that Arevalo — who is Latino — was suspended for only six days, compared to 30 for Burton and 24 for Tohill.
The Result
The jury sided with the captains, awarding them a total of $1.6 million — $170,000 more than Pierce received in the original lawsuit.
Interestingly, the captains were ready to settle the case for $250,000 apiece early on but the city balked.
The Lessons
There are several:
- Employers must have policies and procedures in place to ensure full and fair investigations of all claims of harassment and discrimination. Check out our handy investigation checklist to make sure you get all the facts and make the right decisions.
- Discrimination is discrimination — favoring minority employees over non-minority employees can result in reverse discrimination claims.
- Think long and hard before taking any case to trial. Settlement may be your best option, particularly if you consider the prospect of additional attorneys’ fees and potentially negative PR.














March 12th, 2008 at 10:49 am
The term “reverse discrimination” irritates me. Discrimination is discrimination is discrimination. Some of it is legal and some of it isn’t. In this case, only knowing the facts presented in this blog post, it sounds like a bunch of guys acting like idiots on a regular basis is the root of the problem.
March 13th, 2008 at 5:49 am
Good point. Lots of employers seem to miss the “discrimination is discrimination is discrimination” piece. Too many employers try to show that they’re tough on discrimination/harassment by disciplining alleged harassers or supervisors without a full and fair investigation. Employers have to treat ALL employee fairly. Those that don’t may end up like the city in this case, with lawsuits from both sides.
March 18th, 2008 at 10:00 am
I don’t get it. If they found the captains not at fault, and they found testimonial from the complainant’s co-worker that it “didn’t have to do with race”. Then wouldn’t the award for compensatory damages to the captains reverse the findings for the complaining firefighter? Why award him damages when it was found that there was no race involved. I am assuming it was because of the lack of investigation procedures in place?