I was working as a field auditor and discovered a branch sign that stated, "no hats, no hoods, no sunglasses." I found this sign to be racially discriminatory and took it down since part of my responsibility was to ensure proper branch signage. I felt that the reference targeted African Americans whose style of dress was being challenged.
When I reported thsis to my superviosr, she told me that it was a policy of Sovereign Bank to display the signage. I brought to her attention the fact that there was no way to police the policy and provided her with the example of a black male coming in the branch wiith a hat or hood and sunglasses, and a white woman who came in wearing the same items. It was doubtful that the white woman would be asked to remove the items, but suspicion would fall on the black male who might be asked to remove the accessories.
After furhter internet researdh, I discovered that this policy was originallly brought about by a banking group in Massachusetts in order to deter the growing number of bank robberies. Bank of Boston, which had mergerd with Sovereign Bank, had this policy in place before the merger. The branches I audited in PA and NJ were never introduced to this policy, however, so technically I was correct in removing the sign.
My supervisor did not appreciate the emails I had sent to her and I was terminated. I filed a discrimination report with the Human Relations Commission which took three years to review. Once they decided that no discrimination was evident, I was able to file my own lawsuit against the bank. This resulted in a minimal cash compensation that settled out of court.
I believe I was actually wrongfully terminated for doing my job.
0 comments