Retaliation is now the leading basis for charges against employers, and it remains the stupidest of all charges. Stupid because most retaliation charges can be avoided if managers and supervisors just think before they act.
Laws prohibiting retaliation as a form of workplace discrimination have expanded rapidly in the past few years, says Joan S. Farrell, J.D., BLR Legal Editor. New state and local fair employment laws have been enacted with provisions prohibiting retaliation, and decisions by courts and regulatory agencies have broadened the scope of coverage for existing laws.
The upshot? Retaliation is now the most common charge filed by employees.
Federal laws like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and the Family and Medical Leave Act prohibit retaliation by employers when an employee complains of workplace discrimination or otherwise engages in “protected activity” like being a witness in an investigation, or filing a workplace discrimination charge with the EEOC.
Many other statutes, both state and federal (e.g., whistleblower statutes, state workers’ compensation statutes, laws governing jury service) contain retaliatory prohibitions as well.
Furthermore, under a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, an employer can’t take adverse action against an employee based on a close relationship with an employee who’s engaged in protected activity.
Based on another Court decision, the U.S. Department of Labor has stated that protected activity under the Fair Labor Standards Act includes both oral and written complaints, including those made to an employer.
Steady Climb of Retaliation Suits
Not surprisingly, the number of retaliation claims filed with the EEOC has been climbing steadily for years; and now retaliation claims are the most frequently filed type of workplace discrimination claim. The EEOC reports that charges alleging retaliation were the most numerous at 37,334 charges received, or 37.4 percent of all charges.
HR budget cuts? Let us help. HR.BLR.com is your one-stop solution for all your HR compliance and training needs. Take a no-cost, no-obligation trial and get a complimentary copy of our special report Critical HR Recordkeeping—From Hiring to Termination. It’s yours—no matter what you decide.
Retaliation Often Survives
What’s particularly frustrating for employers is that a retaliation claim can survive even when the underlying complaint of workplace discrimination is dismissed.
That’s because the legal standards for proving retaliation are different from the standards for proving discrimination in employment. Generally, an individual can establish a retaliation claim by showing that:
- he or she engaged in a protected activity;
- he or she suffered an adverse employment action; and
- there was a causal connection between the protected activity and the adverse employment action
One might think that showing the “causal connection” might be difficult, but it’s often shown simply by timing—for example, a termination occurred soon after an employee made a protected complaint. The employee alleges that this “proves” that the negative action was retaliation for the protected act.
While timing isn’t “proof,” it can be used as evidence and it can be hard to refute. (Conversely, a longer span between protected act and alleged retaliation typically weakens the employee’s argument that the adverse action was taken in response to protected activity.)
Find out what the buzz is all about. Take a no-cost look at HR.BLR.com, solve your top problem, and get a complimentary gift.
Why Are Retaliation Suits So Prevalent Today?
Aggressive attorneys have realized that retaliation suits are “low-hanging fruit.” They are relatively easy to tack on to another suit, and, as mentioned above, they often survive even when the underlying suits fails. For example, here’s how it could often go:
- Employee sues the company, alleging race discrimination
- Two weeks later, the employee is fired for “poor performance”
- Employee adds retaliation to the lawsuit, claiming that the termination was retaliation for having filed the race discrimination suit
- Judge rules against the employee and the race discrimination complaint
- The “poor performance” reason for the termination falls apart when recent performance appraisals say “Good”
- The retaliation claim succeeds
In tomorrow’s Advisor, what to do to prevent retaliation suits, plus an introduction to the all-HR-in-one website that help you to avoid all types of employee lawsuits.
This maybe all well and true, but you may be forgetting the other side of the equation. A good chance that this employee may have been borderline prior, then made a complaint. Then the “complaint” becomes the final “proof” the this employee is not a team player, rather than use proper grievance procedures, they went directly to EEOC or DOL, or whomever, revealing that they are not a team player. But I agree, termination has a very good chance of a lawsuit, that is why good documentation is the only way.
Retaliation is so hard to prove or taken seriously! Personally I was retaliated against for filing a grievance with my union against my supervisor and director. I had proof too. Not only that, retaliation and harrassment continued, so I filed a complaint with State and Federal agencies. Most of the agencies claimed that my complaint was not in there jurisdiction. California state department of employment and housing did file a complaint on my behalf but failed to investigate thoroughly. Even though I had documentation and I even had witnesses!