Two former hotel utility stewards alleging age, race, and national origin discrimination as well as retaliation claims cannot proceed to trial on these matters, according to a decision recently issued by Chief United States District Judge Susan Oki Mollway.

The employees' Title VII discrimination claims were dismissed because they failed to provide any evidence showing that a similarly situated individual outside their protected categories was treated more favorably. Judge Mollway likewise held that the plaintiffs' Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) claims should be dismissed because they failed to provide evidence showing they were replaced by substantially younger employees with equal or inferior qualifications. The court further reasoned that even if they could make such a showing, the company had a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for terminating them. The employees had been reported for harassing and extorting money from a coworker by requiring him to pay two dollars each time he requested a tray of drinking glasses to set up hotel restaurant tables. After an investigation that included interviews with fourteen other witnesses, the company concluded that there was sufficient evidence corroborating the allegations against these employees to justify terminating them. While the plaintiffs alleged that this reason was pretextual for discrimination because several managers involved in the investigation had discriminatory animus, they offered no evidence supporting this claim. As such, Judge Mollway concluded that "bare and unsupported allegations of a discriminatory conspiracy to oust them do not come close to meeting the requirement of specific and substantial evidence" to justify trial. The court also dismissed the plaintiffs' retaliation claims because they were not supported by any evidence in the record. Freitas v. Kyo-Ya Hotels & Resorts, LP