An onsite manager alleged race and sex discrimination, but the court never reached the substance of her claims. Why? Because she worked for a contractor—not the school network she sued. The case was dismissed.
Here’s what every employer who works with vendors, staffing firms, or third-party service providers needs to know.
TL;DR: A school system defeated a race, sex and retaliation lawsuit because the plaintiff wasn’t their employee—even though she had a company email, office space, and took direction from their managers. Title VII only applies to employers. If you contract out, make sure you don’t act like one.
📄 Read the opinion
The Facts: She Worked Onsite, Took Instructions—and Still Lost Her Case
A Black woman who managed cafeteria operations at several Philadelphia charter schools alleged race and sex discrimination and retaliation. She worked for a third-party food services vendor. But she was embedded inside the schools, had a company email address, and was expected to follow instructions from the school’s managers.
She said those managers made racially inappropriate remarks, and she filed EEOC and USDA complaints. Not long after, her employer reassigned her—and eventually terminated her.
She sued the school under Title VII. The court tossed her claims without ever reaching the merits.
The Law: Who Counts as an “Employer” Under Title VII?
Title VII applies only to employment relationships. So courts ask: who actually employed the plaintiff?
In this case, the answer was clear:
- The contractor hired her
- The contractor paid her
- The contractor evaluated her
- The contractor reassigned and fired her
While the school gave day-to-day direction—like asking her to train staff or attend meetings—it had no authority over hiring, firing, pay, or discipline.
Even though she worked onsite and interacted with school personnel daily, that wasn’t enough to qualify the school as an employer under Title VII—so the court affirmed summary judgment and dismissed her case.
Keep Your Hands Off the HR Buttons
If you bring in contractors, don’t start acting like their employer. That means no performance reviews, no pay decisions, no involvement in hiring or firing. Direct the work, not the worker.
In this case, the school gave her a badge, an office, and some daily tasks. But it didn’t touch the HR stuff—and that saved them.
The court applied the same legal test it used in a prior decision involving a temp worker and a retail chain. There, the host company had enough control over the worker’s pay, discipline, and legal compliance that it counted as an employer. Here, by contrast, the school didn’t control pay or discipline and didn’t treat the worker like its own employee. That distinction made all the difference.
Courts care about who pulls the levers on pay, discipline, and employment status. If that’s not you, keep it that way.
Final Thought
You can outsource the work, but if your managers take over pay, discipline, or supervision, you’re not outsourcing the risk. And when a contractor is on-site every day, it’s easy to forget where the boundaries are. Make sure your team knows where their authority stops—before a court redraws the line for you.
