## Facts

- Dafro M. Jefferies, a Black woman, worked for Harris County Community Action Association (HCCAA) from 1967 until her termination effective April 26, 1974.
- She was hired as Secretary to the Director of Programs, promoted in 1970 to Personnel Interviewer, and repeatedly sought promotions between 1970 and 1974, including Field Representative.
- She served as a union steward from 1970 until termination and filed grievances for herself and other employees.
- On April 2, 1974, HCCAA posted two Field Representative vacancies, open until April 11; Jefferies applied immediately.
- That day, Jefferies saw a personnel action form indicating Eddie Jones, a Black male, had already been selected as Acting Field Representative; the acting executive director told her the posting was a mistake because the position was temporary.
- Jefferies copied the personnel action form and sent it, along with other personnel materials, to a board member who chaired the personnel committee, seeking intervention; the board member reported the dissemination of “confidential” records to management.
- Management investigated; although Jefferies’s supervisor recommended probation under internal guidelines, HCCAA terminated Jefferies for “conduct prejudicial to the interest of HCCAA.”
- Jefferies had filed and/or was preparing to file EEOC charges and alleged HCCAA’s promotion decision and termination were based on race and sex discrimination and retaliation.

## Issues

1. Whether HCCAA unlawfully failed to promote Jefferies in violation of Title VII § 703(a) because of race and sex, including discrimination against Black women as a distinct protected class.
2. Whether HCCAA unlawfully terminated Jefferies in violation of Title VII § 703(a) because of race and sex.
3. Whether HCCAA terminated Jefferies in retaliation, in violation of Title VII § 704(a), for EEOC-related activity and/or opposition to perceived discrimination, and whether her conduct (including copying and sending personnel documents) was protected opposition.
4. Whether the district court’s findings and legal analysis were sufficiently specific to permit review, including comparative qualifications evidence in the promotion claim.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded.
- The court held the district court’s analysis of the promotion-discrimination claim was legally inadequate because it did not treat discrimination against Black women as a distinct Title VII theory and did not make specific, reviewable findings on comparative qualifications.
- The court held the district court inadequately addressed the retaliation theory, including whether Jefferies’s informal notice of intent to file an EEOC charge and her dissemination of documents constituted protected opposition and whether a causal connection existed.
- The case was remanded for further findings and conclusions applying the correct standards to the promotion and retaliation claims.

## Legal Principles

- Title VII permits claims based on the combined characteristics of race and sex; an employer’s nondiscrimination toward Black men or white women does not, by itself, defeat a claim of discrimination against Black women.
- In individual disparate-treatment promotion cases, the factfinder must make specific findings on comparative qualifications and the employer’s articulated reasons to allow meaningful review of pretext.
- Title VII’s retaliation provision protects certain opposition to perceived unlawful practices and participation in EEOC processes; whether particular conduct is protected and whether discipline was causally related are fact-specific questions requiring explicit findings.
- Trial courts must articulate findings and legal reasoning with enough specificity to show the correct standards were applied and to permit appellate review.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit required the district court to analyze whether Jefferies experienced discrimination as a Black woman, to make explicit comparative-qualification findings on the promotion decision, and to determine whether her EEOC-related activity and internal opposition (including document dissemination) were protected and causally linked to her termination, vacating and remanding those portions for further findings.


Jefferies v. Harris Cnty. Cmty. Action Ass'n, 615 F.2d 1025 (5th Cir. 1980)