When harassment allegations surface, we often advise separating the two parties to minimize chances of more misbehavior. Sometimes, employees find their own ways to keep away from harassers. However, business realities can make that unsustainable.
Some employers mistakenly believe that having employees work on a contractual basis will save them from litigation. If they decide not to renew the contracts of workers considered “troublemakers,” they figure they can avoid being sued. That’s a big mistake.
Here’s a tip that may save you from unnecessary litigation: When it comes to disciplining a disruptive worker, focus on the behavior. Don’t speculate on the reason the employee may be disruptive.
Some employers want to avoid litigation and don’t like to discipline someone they are sure will sue. That can be a mistake, especially if the employee in question is harassing or discriminating against others.
While a real adverse employment action may trigger a retaliation claim, many minor changes aren’t truly adverse. For example, moving an employee to a different office without changing anything substantial about his job probably isn’t retaliation.
A former meat packer at the Smithfield Foods plant in Clinton has a bone to pick with the company. She claims her complaints about food safety went unheeded and uninvestigated during her 18 months on the job.
Courts seem to be losing patience with so-called pro se lawsuits in which workers act as their own lawyers to sue and provide no specifics about alleged employer wrongdoing.
It’s illegal to retaliate against employees for complaining about sex discrimination or harassment. The employee’s initial complaint doesn’t have to pan out, either. It’s enough that the employee reasonably believed in good faith that she was being discriminated against.
When an employee complains about discrimination and then finds himself part of a reduction in force, he may have a tough time proving that the complaint had anything to do with the layoff. But if he then ends up being the only employee never recalled or rehired, he may have a retaliation case.
Even if an internal discrimination complaint proves unfounded, you must still ensure that the employee who complained isn’t punished for doing so. Remind supervisors and the employee that you won’t tolerate any type of retaliation.