Imagine you are somehow different from your co-workers. Imagine your supervisor assigns you work that is well below your skill level while other, less ­experienced employees receive complex and interesting tasks. Imagine someone repeatedly writes derogatory comments on a time sheet clearly directed to you. Imagine the penultimate insult occurs when your supervisor brands you with a slur and threatens to fire you in front of a crowd. Two weeks after you report the threat and degradation, the company unceremoniously fires you for “lack of work.”

This scenario may seem implausible but in a recent, high-profile case in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, ­appellants Atron Castleberry and John Brown allege these events occurred at Chesapeake Energy Corp. after a staffing agency, STI Group, placed them there as subcontractors. Castleberry and Brown are African-American and fall within a protected class under federal and state nondiscrimination laws. The men claim they experienced a hostile work environment, received disparate treatment because of race, were subjected to policies that disparately impacted them because of race, and suffered retaliation for reporting improper conduct—all in violation of 42 U.S.C. Section 1981, see Castleberry v. STI Group, No. 16-3131, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 12611, at *3 (3d Cir. July 14).

This federal statute provides, in relevant part: “All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every state and territory to make and enforce contracts … and to the full and equal benefit of all laws … as is enjoyed by white citizens.” In employment ­discrimination cases, actions brought under this statute are subject to the same analysis as discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as in Brown v. J. Kaz, 581 F.3d 175, 181-82 (3d Cir. 2009). Although each of the claims at issue in the Castleberry case have different ­elements as outlined below, generally speaking, the equivalent interpretation of Section 1981 and Title VII means: Castleberry and Brown must show they endured race-related ­discriminatory conduct and suffered an adverse employment action; Chesapeake and STI must defend the employment decision by showing it was based on legitimate, nondiscriminatory business reasons; and Castleberry and Brown will have an opportunity to rebut Chesapeake and STI's defense by proving the proffered legitimate, nondiscriminatory business reasons are pretextual, as in McDonnell Douglas v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973), (adopting burden-shifting framework).