Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 43703-1-II Published Opinion.pdf

Co., 162 Wn.2d 340, 354 n. 7, 172 P. 3d 688 ( 2007). To establish a prima facie. disparate

treatment discrimination case, a plaintiff must show that his employer simply treats some people

less favorably than others because of their protected status. Johnson v. Dep' t of Soc. & Health

Servs., 80 Wn. App. 212, 226, 907 P. 2d 1223 ( 1996). A plaintiff may establish a prima facie

case by either offering direct evidence of an employer' s discriminatory intent, or by satisfying

the McDonnell Douglas burden -shifting test that gives rise to an inference of discrimination.

Kastanis v. Educ. Emps.' Credit Union, 122 Wn.2d 483, 491, 859 P. 2d 26, 865 P. 2d 507 ( 1993).

Under the direct evidence test, a plaintiff can establish a prima facie case by providing

direct evidence that ( 1) the defendant employer acted with a discriminatory motive and ( 2) the

i discriminatory motivation was a significant or substantial factor in an employment decision.

Kastanis, 122 Wn.2d at 491. We generally consider an employer' s discriminatory remarks to be

direct evidence of discrimination. See Johnson v. Express Rent & Own, Inc., 113 Wn. App. 858,

to
Because we rely on direct evidence, we need not perform a McDonnell Douglas burden -
shifting analysis. See Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A., 534 U.S. 506, 511, 122 S. Ct. 992, 152 L.
Ed. 2d 1 ( 2002).

7
             

No. 43703 -1 - II

862 -63, 56 P. 3d 567 ( 2002) ( reversing summary judgment based on supervisor' s ageist

comments that plaintiff did not fit company' s image of "a youthful, fit, `GQ' looking mold ")."

B. Discriminatory motive

To satisfy the direct evidence test, Alonso must show that Qwest acted with