The Human Rights Commission voted that there are reasonable grounds to believe SHP Management Corporation discriminated against and retaliated against a maintenance technician, Mr. Kenord, on the basis of race, color and national origin and for engaging in protected activity.

Attorney Martin Tarr, representing the complainant, argued the commission's record left key questions unanswered about who made the termination decision and argued the employer shifted reasons for firing Mr. Kenord after he filed a discrimination charge. Tarr urged the commission to apply the Maine Whistleblower Protection Act's substantial-factor causation standard and to find the record raised at least an "even chance" that protected activity or bias influenced the termination.

Respondent counsel said affidavits and IRC testimony showed the termination was driven by job performance and changing job requirements. Respondent described instances in which supervisors said the complainant failed to perform assigned tasks and said a different maintenance worker had greater skills and reliability.

The parties and the investigator disputed whether alleged remarks by a supervisor' including an instance where the supervisor used a nickname and referred to the complainant as "lazy"'constituted subordinate bias. The complainant's counsel argued the remarks, combined with a white comparator who remained employed and other documentary evidence, supported an inference of discrimination. The investigator and respondent argued the remarks were about specific incidents and did not demonstrate a causal connection to the termination decision.

Following deliberations the commission voted to find reasonable grounds on discrimination and retaliation counts. Commissioners directed staff to proceed with the statutory conciliation process and will notify parties of next steps.