Neal seeks to review law that protects small businesses from discrimination suits

Monday, April 15, 2002 | 9:21 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- State Sen. Joe Neal says he will ask today for a bill to change a law that protects small businesses from racial discrimination lawsuits filed by fired employees.

"We need to revisit that law," said Neal, D-North Las Vegas, the first black to be elected to the state Senate.

His decision was prompted by a Nevada Supreme Court ruling Friday that refused to expand Nevada's law, which restricts racial discrimination lawsuits to businesses that employ 15 or more workers.

Justice Miriam Shearing, who wrote the majority decision, said the Legislature "is free to make the distinction between large and small businesses."

But the three justices in the minority said the "distinction clearly violates the equal protection clauses of our federal and state constitutions."

Neal said he agreed with the dissent. The Nevada law mirrors the federal Civil Rights Act, he said.

He added he would introduce a bill to lower the present 15 to possibly five employees or the make the exemption allowable only to businesses that employ just family members.

The case involved Miguel Chavez, a Hispanic, who was fired from ProSource Sales & Marketing in Washoe County after two years working as an at-will employee. The company said it was for incompetence.

Chavez sued, claiming he was fired because of his race. He said he worked in an environment hostile to Hispanics and his bosses called Hispanic workers stupid or morons.

District Judge Steven Elliott granted a pretrial summary judgment in favor of the business, citing the state law applying such lawsuits to businesses with 15 or more employees.

"The Legislature sets the public policy of this state regarding racial discrimination in employment," the majority wrote in backing Elliott. "Since the Legislature determined that small businesses should not be subject to racial discrimination suits, we decline to create an exception to the at-will doctrine for alleged racial discrimination at these businesses"

The dissenting opinion, written by Justice Bob Rose said, "To rule otherwise would permit the Legislature to declare racial discrimination illegal, but arbitrarily provide a remedy to some but not to all, employees who are victims of this insidious practice."