ALVIN MOORE v. COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY CONSOLIDATED nka Coca-Cola Consolidated, Inc. - Articles

All Content

ALVIN MOORE v. COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY CONSOLIDATED nka Coca-Cola Consolidated, Inc.

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Aug 22, 2024

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Donyetta D. Bailey, BAILEY LAW OFFICE, LLC, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Pamela E. Palmer, ELARBEE THOMPSON SAPP & WILSON LLP, Atlanta, Georgia, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Donyetta D. Bailey, BAILEY LAW OFFICE, LLC, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellant.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Pamela E. Palmer, Brent L. Wilson, Gillian G. Furqueron, ELARBEE THOMPSON SAPP & WILSON LLP, Atlanta, Georgia, for Appellee.

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Cincinnati

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. Alvin Moore (“Moore”) held various positions at Coca-Cola Bottling Company (“CCBC”) from 2015 to 2018. In March 2017, Moore was involved in an accident at work and underwent drug testing, pursuant to CCBC’s drug and alcohol policy. Moore tested positive for marijuana, although the amount in his sample was less than the amount that CCBC’s drug policy prohibits. CCBC nevertheless negotiated a Second Chance Agreement (“SCA”) with its employees’ union and Moore, which stated that Moore would be subject to twenty-four months of random drug testing. Later, in June 2017, Moore was cited as being insubordinate for swearing and inciting a work slowdown during a pre-shift meeting. Moore was terminated, but his union negotiated a Last Chance Agreement (“LCA”) with CCBC. In a meeting with his supervisor, David Boland (“Boland”), and the union vice president, Frank Arrington (“Arrington”), Moore signed the LCA, which stated that he discharged CCBC from any and all liability relating to his employment. In 2018, while Moore was still under the SCA and the LCA, he tested positive for marijuana. He was terminated from CCBC on July 31, 2018, when he was still subject to the SCA, but at which point Moore’s LCA had expired. He sued CCBC for racial discrimination and retaliation, in violation of Title VII and Ohio law, and CCBC moved for summary judgment. The district court granted CCBC’s motion for summary judgment, and Moore timely appealed. For the reasons explained below, we REVERSE and REMAND for further proceedings.

Attachments: