Former City Employee Awarded Nearly $100K In Discrimination Suit Against San Diego, Claims Hispanic Supervisor Showed Bias Against Black Workers

Demetris Wimberley, a former San Diego Streets Division laborer, has been awarded a settlement of roughly $100,000 after filing a lawsuit against the city claiming he faced discrimination because he is Black and was retaliated against when he spoke up against unsafe work conditions. 

San Diego street laborers. Screengrab Sandiego.gov

The City Council in his case unanimously approved a settlement for $97,500 back in August during a private session, the Union-Tribune reported. The meeting was closed to the public due to legal matters brought up in discussion. However, the settlement is coming “without an admission of liability” about Wimberley’s claims.

Those claims included the department using a minor vehicle crash in January 2018 as reason to terminate him in retaliation for bringing about complaints.

The former employee’s accusations were primarily based on discrimination he says he faced and the mistreatment he was met with following an on-the-job injury.

Wimberley’s lawsuit alleged a bias for Latino workers in the workplace and that the Hispanic supervisor rarely spoke English to the employees. In addition, Black workers were forced to work in dangerous conditions when staff availability was low, whereas their Latino co-workers were not. 

Wimberley also claimed he was assigned to less desirable shifts and was not given many opportunities for overtime, nor was he given tasks that would likely lead to a promotion. The man says the series of incidents took place almost immediately after he was brought on the team in November 2016.

Roughly six months into the job, Wimberley suffered a fractured foot. The suit states that he was forced to return to work just a few days later despite still walking around with the assistance of crutches. 

Complaints were made but reportedly ignored. Then, when Wimberley reported the situation surrounding his injury to the city’s fraud and abuse hotline, higher-ups allegedly began retaliating against him, starting by extending his probation past the original one-year expiration. 

He was subsequently fired after the minor crash, but documents claim his employer prevaricated about the cause. “The city lied about the existence of evidence and altered documents to hide the true reason for Mr. Wimberley’s termination,” it stated. 

Wimberley was fired in January 2018 after working with the city for just a little over a year. He requested a transfer to another city department in the fall of 2017 prior to his termination, but he was denied. 

Still independent.

We hope this story was worth your time. For over 14 years, Atlanta Black Star has stayed Black-owned and independently run. We didn't get here by waiting on ad budgets that were never built to prioritize us. Our readers did that.

Corporate support for Black media has always been thin. Outlets like ours get roughly 1% of the $170 billion spent on U.S. advertising each year, and that margin is shrinking further as advertisers walk back the DEI-linked commitments they made in 2020. That's the backdrop. It's not why we're asking.

The wider picture isn't any steadier. Newspaper ad revenue has fallen more than 80% since 2005, and local newsrooms are closing at a rate of roughly two a week nationwide. When outlets go under, it's rarely the ones built to center a Black perspective from the ground up that get to stick around.

We know a request for support isn't why you came here. But without readers choosing to fund this work directly, the depth of reporting we can do at home and abroad shrinks along with everyone else's. If you're not in a position to give, that doesn't change how much we value you as a reader.

If you are able to, a recurring contribution does more for us than a single one-time gift, because it lets us plan the next investigation instead of just the next invoice. It takes about 30 seconds, no long form, no account. Thank you for continuing to support independent journalism and freedom of the press.

Back to top