BSCR Firm News/Blogs Feed

Legal Administrative Assistant, Portland

16 Jun 2026

Our Portland office is seeking a highly motivated and skilled Legal Administrative Assistant. View the job description here.

Senior Attorney - Insurance Coverage, Portland

16 Jun 2026

Our Portland office has an opportunity for an attorney with 8 - 10 years of experience in all phases of commercial litigation, including insurance coverage work. View the job description here.

Associate Attorney, Portland

16 Jun 2026

Our Portland office has an opportunity for an attorney with 4 or more years of experience in all phases of commercial litigation. View the job description here.

10th Circuit DEI holding remains faithful to established hostile work environment test

15 Jun 2026

ABSTRACT: The Tenth Circuit affirmed the dismissal, for failure to state a claim, of an employee’s hostile work environment claim under Title VII arising from his employer’s DEI training program. The Court’s opinion maintained the integrity of the established test for hostile work environment amid the recent war on employer DEI programs.

The Claim – Young v. Colorado Department of Corrections, No. 25-1068 (10th Cir. May 11, 2026)

Plaintiff Joshua Young is a white man who was formerly employed by the Colorado Department of Corrections. His Complaint against his employer alleged that he experienced hostile work environment and constructive discharge under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act due to his employer’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (“DEI”) training program. Mr. Young claimed that his employer’s program made concerning generalizations about the role of white people in oppressing racial minorities. In conjunction with the training, there was a glossary of terms provided with general characterizations about white people in words such as “race”, “white exceptionalism”, and “white fragility.” Mr. Young claimed that department leaders were also advised to let less powerful people speak first and to treat employees differently based upon race. The training also included further video recommendations related to discriminatory housing and intersectionality. The Court had found variations of these same claims insufficient in Mr. Young’s prior appeals; so, in this most recent rendition of his complaint at issue on appeal, Mr. Young further alleged the following:

An ongoing commitment existed for this kind of training.
Employees had to endorse the race-based ideology reflected in the training.
Supervisors acted upon the training for disciplinary decisions.
The training compromised security.
The Department of Corrections failed to investigate his allegations.

But did any of it affect a term, condition, or privilege of his employment? This was the determinative question the Court asked in deciding if Mr. Young had demonstrated a claim that could survive dismissal. The answer was a resounding “no”.

The Law

Traditionally, federal courts across the country have evaluated hostile work environment claims by determining whether the alleged hostile conduct permeated the workplace with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that is “sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim’s employment and create an abusive working environment.” Under the current administration, DEI programs have come under fire as potentially racially discriminatory, which has left employers and their attorneys facing uncertainty in traversing the Title VII minefield. The Court’s opinion in Mr. Young’s case, however, holds the line of established Title VII case law, providing encouragement for employers and their lawyers.

The Holding

The Tenth Circuit determined that Mr. Young’s burden was “extremely high” to allege facts that rendered his workplace “overtly hostile”. The Court held faithful to existing Title VII case law and determined that “To cross this threshold, the training and its aftermath had to create an abusive working environment by altering a term, condition, or privilege of Mr. Young’s job.” Specifically, Mr. Young’s allegations had to plausibly establish that the training to which he took offense affected his job responsibilities, interactions with fellow employees, or career advancement. Mr. Young failed to establish such an impact as the Court found that it was speculative that the training would be an ongoing obligation.

Likewise, his various concerns about security, discipline, and others’ perception of him as racist had not materialized with sufficient factual support outside of his own subjective concerns. The Court also rejected his claim that his employer forced him to endorse the beliefs espoused in the training because the training expressly disclaimed that he needed to change his beliefs and encouraged employees to ask questions. Likewise, Mr. Young could not establish how his employer’s failure to investigate his concerns impacted him. Because his hostile work environment claim failed, his constructive discharge claim also could not stand.

Takeaways: How should employers navigate DEI training?

While not addressed directly by the Tenth Circuit, the additional test by which courts traditionally measure whether an alleged hostile work environment is sufficiently “severe or pervasive” to be actionable is whether the Plaintiff’s allegations are both subjectively and objectively reasonable. Essentially, courts look at whether the plaintiff actually and reasonably perceived the alleged events to be intimidating or hostile, and would the objectively reasonable person agree with them that the alleged events rendered the work environment permeated by hostility affecting their employment?

As the Young opinion suggests, DEI training that is not ongoing or coercive and which lacks an articulable tangible impact on an employee’s terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, is unlikely to result in a successful hostile environment claim. While employers and attorneys should always remain sensitive to case law differences in their own jurisdiction, the Tenth Circuit’s opinion provides a measure of confidence in relying on traditional tests to measure relative legal compliance of DEI training programs with Title VII. Employers should take advantage of this much needed clarity to perform a risk of assessment of their own planned DEI training. In this endeavor, employers might consider the following 10-question checklist:

How often is the employer providing training on DEI topics to its employees?
Is the training mandatory?
Are the training materials sufficiently sensitive to avoid stereotyping groups of people?
Do employees know that they can ask questions, disagree, and challenge ideas?
How does the employer design a training environment open to discussion and debate that remains respectful, comfortable, and safe for employees?
Does the employer have a clear written policy regarding how and to whom employees can report concerns of harassment by other employees?
Does the employer train employees and managers regarding its anti-harassment policy and expectations?
In what ways might the DEI training program be inadvertently endorsing preferential treatment for certain groups of employees based on a protected characteristic?
What is the legitimate business purpose of the DEI goals the employer wishes to achieve?
How can the employer’s DEI goals be met without making protected class the determinative factor in hiring, firing, promotion, demotion, and other formal and informal privileges afforded to employees in the workplace?

The foregoing list is not legal advice, and it is by no means exhaustive nor guaranteed to prevent an employment claim regarding an employer’s DEI training, but it provides a starting point for the robust conversation that should occur with counsel about an employer’s specific situation. Employers are highly encouraged to consult counsel for assistance in reasonably tailoring and implementing their DEI programs.

Director of Human Resources, Kansas City

11 Jun 2026

Our Kansas City office is seeking a strategic, experienced, and business-minded Director of Human Resources. View the job description here.

Baker Sterchi Recognized with Three National Rankings in the 2026 Edition of The Legal 500

11 Jun 2026

Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice has been recognized with three national practice area rankings in the 2026 edition of The Legal 500, a guide used by buyers of legal services to evaluate law firms by practice area.

The firm was ranked in the following categories:

The recognition places Baker Sterchi among firms recognized nationally for their work in commercial disputes, insurance and real estate matters. The Legal 500 rankings focus on practice area team strength and market reputation, with results based on independent research, client and peer feedback, professional references and information submitted by law firms.

Unlike individual attorney honors, firm rankings reflect the collective experience and capabilities of the ranked team. Inclusion reflects the respect a firm has earned among clients and peers within the same practice areas.

Toxic Tort Associate, St. Louis or Belleville

08 Jun 2026

Our St. Louis or Belleville office has an opportunity for an attorney with 3-5 years of experience in toxic tort defense. View the job description here.

Paul Venker to Present on Freedom Suits for NPA Likes Lecture Series

05 Jun 2026

Baker Sterchi attorney Paul Venker will present as part of the New Philadelphia Association’s 22nd Annual Likes Lecture Series on June 9.

Venker’s presentation, “Freedom Suits and the Freedom Suits Memorial,” will address the history of the St. Louis freedom suits and his work with the Freedom Suits Memorial Foundation, where he serves as president. The foundation’s mission includes development of a physical memorial and educational efforts to expand understanding of the cases and the individuals involved.

The St. Louis freedom suits were legal actions brought by more than 300 enslaved people who sought their freedom in St. Louis Circuit Court between the Louisiana Purchase and the Emancipation Proclamation. The memorial honors those individuals, as well as the lawyers and judges who participated in these early civil rights cases.

The New Philadelphia Association is the caretaker organization devoted to memorializing New Philadelphia, Illinois, the first U.S. town founded and planned by a free Black American before the Civil War.

The free Zoom session is scheduled for 7 p.m. Central. Registration is required. For more information or to register, click here.

Bob Christie Elected Secretary of Lawyers for Civil Justice

04 Jun 2026

Baker Sterchi Member Bob Christie has been elected secretary of Lawyers for Civil Justice (LCJ) and will continue his servicing on the organization’s board of directors and Executive Committee.

Lawyers for Civil Justice is a national coalition of companies, law firms and defense bar organizations that advocates for reform of procedural litigation rules to promote the just, speedy and inexpensive resolution of civil claims. LCJ’s advocacy focuses on class actions, multidistrict litigation, expert evidence standards, cost allocation, discovery and third-party litigation funding.

At Baker Sterchi, Christie co-chairs the firm’s Trial & Appellate Practice Group and is a member of the Public-Sector Risk Management & Consulting group. He defends professionals, businesses, governmental entities, law enforcement officers and individuals in high-exposure matters.

Christie is active in several peer-selected legal organizations. He serves as chair of the International Association of Defense Counsel Trial Techniques and Tactics Committee, is a member and past president of the Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel and is a member of the Association of Defense Trial Attorneys.

Christie earned his law degree from Seattle University School of Law and is admitted to practice in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Baker Sterchi and Attorneys Recognized by Chambers USA 2026

04 Jun 2026

Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice and five attorneys have been recognized in the 2026 edition of Chambers USA for insurance, general commercial litigation and product liability litigation in Missouri and the Kansas City metropolitan area.

Firm Recognitions

Insurance, Missouri, Band 2
General Commercial Litigation, Kansas City & Surrounding Areas, Band 3
Product Liability Litigation, Missouri, Band 3

Individual Attorney Recognitions

Clay Crawford and Scott Hofer - Insurance, Missouri, Band 1
Scott Hofer and Scott Kreamer - General Commercial Litigation, Kansas City & Surrounding Areas, Band 4 and Band 3
Jennifer Maloney and John Watt - Product Liability Litigation, Missouri, Band 3

Chambers USA ranks law firms and attorneys across the United States through independent research that includes interviews with clients and other market sources. Rankings assess qualities such as legal ability, professional conduct, client service, commercial awareness, diligence and commitment.