Case Explained: RONALD KING ANTHONY ROBINSON CHRIS SAMUEL NOLAN JONES, JR. BRIAN STRUGGS v. UA LOCAL 91 United Association of Plumbers, Steamfitters, Welders and HVAC Techni- cians UNITED ASSOCIATION OF JOURNEYMEN AND APPRENTICES OF THE PLUMBING AND PIPEFITTING INDUSTRY OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA UNION OF PLUMBERS, FITTERS, WELDERS AND SERVICE TECHNICIANS USCA11 Case: 24-13658 Document: 70-1 Date Filed: 08/10/2026 Page: 1 of 19 2

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Filed: 2026-08-10 Docket: 2:19-cv-01115-ACA The eleventh-circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment and judgment on the pleadings in favor of the unions in a race-discrimination case brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to plausibly plead disparate-treatment claims beyond instances where they were referred for work but white members were referred for leadership positions, rendering evidence outside this scope properly excluded at summary judgment under the *McDonnell Douglas* burden-shifting framework and the “convincing mosaic” standard. Regarding disparate-impact claims, the court found the plaintiffs failed to satisfy the robust causality requirement by not isolating specific employment practices responsible for statistical disparities, noting that call-by-name referrals were ministerial acts by the union. The court further determined that evidence of a Confederate flag and isolated racist comments did not meet the “severe or pervasive” standard required for hostile-environment claims under *Adams v. Austal*. Finally, the court affirmed the dismissal of class allegations because the plaintiffs failed to challenge all independent grounds for dismissal in their brief, thereby abandoning one rationale. The district court’s orders remain effective, resulting in judgment for the defendants. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.