A federal appeals court has reinstated a retaliation charged filed by a fired black city worker whose supervisor kept marking her tardy for arriving five minutes late although she had permission to do so and kept track of her bathroom breaks.

Felicia Strothers, who had more than 20 years of experience, was hired by the City of Laurel, Maryland, for an administrative assistant position even through her direct supervisor said she “wanted someone of a different race,” according to Friday’s ruling by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, in Felicia Strothers v. City of Laurel, Maryland.

Before she started work, she had received permission from another official to come in at 9:05 instead of the 9 a.m. starting time because of her children’s bus schedule, but despite that, from her first day at work, the direct supervisor reported her as tardy by 10 minutes. She also “tracked and faulted Strother’s every absence from her desk, including bathroom breaks,” said the ruling.

Other incidents included the supervisor charging Ms. Strothers with wearing impermissible leggings on casual Friday, and loudly berating her about it in front of the entire office, even though the pants were labeled jeans, according to the ruling.

Other former city black employees also complained about their treatment by this supervisor.

Ms. Strothers was terminated the day after she said she planned to file a formal grievance against the supervisor, allegedly for tardiness. Ms. Strothers filed suit against the city on charges of discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the U.S. District Court in Greenbelt, Maryland, granted the city summary judgment dismissing the case.

On appeal of the retaliation charge, a three-judge appeals court panel unanimously reinstated the case. “Strothers knew three things that suggested she was the target for racial discrimination, rather than a mere ‘workplace squabble,’” said the ruling.

“First, former employees revealed history and pattern of racial discrimination.

“Second, she was singled out for disparate treatment from the moment she arrived on the job for reasons unrelated to her job.

“Third, the director of her department cited Strother’s race when she complained about her disparate treatment and harassment,” said the ruling.

The District Court “erred when it concluded that Strothers failed to demonstrate a prima facie case of retaliation,” said the ruling in reversing the District Court’s grant of summary judgment and remanding the case for further proceedings.

In June, a federal appeals court reinstated wrongful termination charges filed by a fired Wells Fargo Bank N.A. loan officer in a divided opinion.