May 21 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court panel on Tuesday

seemed unlikely to revive a lawsuit brought by a white former

manager at Honeywell International ( HON ) accusing the engineering

company of illegally firing him for refusing to complete a brief

training session on unconscious workplace bias.

All three judges on the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

panel during oral arguments in Chicago suggested that because

plaintiff Charles Vavra did not watch the mandatory video on

preventing unconscious bias, he could not reasonably believe the

training was racist.

"It would be very different if your client had watched it

and came in and said 'I found it discriminatory for the

following reasons,'" Circuit Judge Amy St. Eve said to Vavra's

lawyer, Alec Beck.

Beck told the panel that unconscious bias training, which

became common after nationwide protests in 2020 over the

treatment of Black people by police, was inherently racist

because it teaches that members of certain races harbor specific

beliefs.

He said that Honeywell ( HON ) did not provide details about the

content of the training during discovery. But even without it,

the court could look at the context in which Honeywell ( HON ) began

mandating the training in the aftermath of the deaths of Breonna

Taylor and George Floyd, two of the Black Americans killed at

the hands of police in 2020, Beck said.

"I agree that if I had the program and it said 'all white

people suck,' that'd be great. We don't have that here," he

said.

But Circuit Judge Thomas Kirsch said that because Vavra

never saw the video, he still could not show that he believed it

was discriminatory when he complained, which is required to

prove that a plaintiff was engaged in protected activity under

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Vavra sued Honeywell ( HON ) in 2021, claiming he was fired from his

role as an estimating manager earlier that year after sending a

lengthy email to human resources detailing his objections to the

training and calling it "reckless and irresponsible." He accused

Honeywell ( HON ) of retaliation in violation of Title VII.

U.S. District Judge Jorge Alonso dismissed the case last

year, agreeing with Honeywell ( HON ) that Vavra could not have believed

he was engaged in protected activity when he complained about

the training because he had not viewed it. Alonso also agreed

with the company's argument that Vavra was fired for refusing to

complete the training, and not for complaining about it.

Jennifer Colvin, a lawyer for Honeywell ( HON ), told the 7th

Circuit panel on Tuesday that Vavra's only exposure to the

training was a Honeywell ( HON ) executive's email that first announced

it in 2020 and said it was designed to "create an environment

that values everyone's perspectives."

"No reasonable person could've read that and thought that

[the executive's] email combined with the training was going to

vilify an entire class of white people," Colvin said.

The panel includes St. Eve, Kirsch and Circuit Judge Michael

Scudder, all of whom are appointees of Republican former

President Donald Trump.

The case is Vavra v. Honeywell International Inc ( HON ), 7th U.S.

Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 23-2823.

For Vavra: Alec Beck of Parker Daniels Kibort

For Honeywell ( HON ): Jennifer Colvin of Ogletree Deakins Nash

Smoak & Stewart

Read more:

U.S. companies vow to fight racism but face critics on

diversity

Some companies alter diversity policies after conservatives'

lawsuit threat

(Reporting by Daniel Wiessner in Albany, New York)