Client Alert - Employment Law Update
United States Supreme Court Raises Bar Facing Plaintiffs in Retaliation Cases
The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued a ruling that establishes an important standard to be applied in cases of retaliation under Title VII. The case continues the Supreme Court's trend, requiring higher standards of proof in most discrimination cases.
The case of University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, No. 12-484 (June 24, 2013) began when Dr. Naiel Nassar left his employment with the University of Texas. Believing that a supervisor was discriminating against him because of his religious and ethnic background, Dr. Nassar resigned his university faculty position and accepted an employment offer solely with the university's hospital. In doing so, he sent a resignation letter, saying he was the victim of bias against Arabs and Muslims. Dr. Nassar alleged that the university then retaliated against him by complaining to the hospital, which withdrew its employment offer.
Dr. Nassar sued the University for, among other things, retaliating against him for complaining about the discrimination. Dr. Nassar won at the trial and appellate levels where the legal question was whether his background was a motivating factor in the university's decision. The Supreme Court took the case to decide if that standard was correct in a case of retaliation under Title VII.
Title VII, But-For Causation, and the Court's Decision
As explained in an earlier Client Alert, the Supreme Court has been addressing the proper standard of proof in various types of discrimination cases. In recent years, it has moved away from allowing so called "mixed motive" cases, or those in which unlawful discrimination was a motivating, but not the only, factor. Instead, it has required a "but-for" standard, meaning that an employer is only liable if it acted solely because of the unlawful discrimination.
Title VII prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, gender, religion, or national origin. These claims are known as "status-based" discrimination. A separate section of Title VII prohibits retaliation against individuals who oppose practices that are unlawful under Title VII.
The Supreme Court decided that the more lenient mixed-motive standard only applies to status-based claims under Title VII because of specific statutory language. As with other types of discrimination claims, retaliation under Title VII must now be proven to be the sole reason for an employer's action.
What to do
This ruling will certainly make it more difficult for plaintiffs to establish retaliation claims under Title VII. As Justice Kennedy wrote, this standard of proof will make it much easier to secure dismissal of "dubious claims at the summary judgment stage." With the increase in retaliation claims in recent years, employers should be heartened by this decision.
If you would like more information about this decision, or have questions about your employment policies and practices in general, please contact Mr. Gonzalez at 312-558-9779 or at egonzalez@elvisgonzalezltd.com.
|