• The HR Specialist - Print Newsletter
  • HR Specialist: Employment Law
  • The HR Weekly

Retaliation

Associational discrimination: How close is close enough?

03/06/2009

Last year, in Thompson v. North Am. Stainless, the 6th Circuit recognized a claim under Title VII’s anti-retaliation provision for associational retaliation: “Title VII prohibit[s] employers from taking retaliatory action against employees not directly involved in protected activity, but who are so closely related to or associated with” employees who engage in protected activity. I remain critical of this standard because it leaves open the issue of how close is close enough.

Don’t be fooled: ‘Quit or be fired’ won’t stop employee from filing lawsuit

03/03/2009

Some companies mistakenly believe that offering an employee the option of quitting or being fired can save them from a later lawsuit. That isn’t always the case even if the employee decides to resign. In fact, an employee who quits to avoid being fired may have been “constructively discharged” and can still sue …

Will county auditor get to review his own settlement check?

03/03/2009

Back in 2004, Grimes County Auditor Sidney “Buck” LaQuey took a shine to Bridgette Massey, whom he hired to work in his office—even though she had no auditing experience. Eventually, Massey filed an EEOC complaint in 2006, followed by a lawsuit in 2007, alleging sexual harassment and retaliation …

U.S. Supreme Court rules: Prepare for more retaliation claims

03/03/2009

On Jan. 26, the U.S. Supreme Court once again expanded the ability of employees to sue for retaliation. The court held that an employee who answers a question about a fellow employee’s improper conduct during an internal sexual harassment investigation is engaging in “protected activity” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

Making false sexual harassment complaints

03/03/2009

Q. May an employer include language in its sexual harassment policy imposing discipline on employees who bring false claims of harassment?

Know what constitutes insubordination

02/26/2009

Employees who oppose their employer’s illegal or discriminatory conduct are protected from retaliation. But that doesn’t mean such employees have the right to be insubordinate, rude and nasty. There’s a fine line between voicing opposition to a practice and challenging superiors in an insolent way.

Offer legit ‘fresh-start’ transfer without fear of being punished for retaliation

02/26/2009

Sometimes, an employee isn’t a good fit for a particular job assignment and becomes frustrated that things aren’t working out. Employers that transfer such an employee with the genuine intent to give her a fresh start in another department probably won’t run into legal hot water.

Beware firing after worker warns about safety

02/24/2009

Former employees and their lawyers are always looking for ways to maximize what they can get from former employers. One way is to add a wrongful discharge claim if an employee is fired after he or she complains about workplace safety. These cases can get quite expensive, as the following case shows.

Cal State Fresno settles coach’s bias claim for $5.2 million

02/24/2009

California State University Fresno has settled a suit brought by a female former volleyball coach who accused the school of sex discrimination. The settlement was reached 18 months after a California Superior Court jury returned a $5.85 million verdict in the favor of Lindy Vivas …

Retaliation ruling could cost Contra Costa County $1 million

02/24/2009

A government employee has won a jury trial against Contra Costa County, and the verdict may cost the county more than $1 million.