The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled today (Jan. 26, 2009) that the anti-retaliation provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 apply to employees who voluntarily cooperate with an employer’s internal investigations, even if the employee didn’t initiate the investigation and has filed no formal charge.
In the case, Vicky Crawford was asked to participate in an ongoing internal sexual harassment investigation. During the investigation, Crawford alleged that she herself had been sexually harassed in the workplace, and months later, she was discharged. Crawford claimed she was fired in retaliation for her statements during the investigation and filed suit against Metro Nashville Schools.
Both the trial court and the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that Crawford’s conduct wasn’t protected by Title VII. Specifically, the Sixth Circuit noted that merely answering questions in the investigation wasn’t enough to constitute opposition of discrimination or participation in an investigation, both of which are protected by Title VII. The court held that opposing discrimination must be more active than just answering questions during an investigation. Further, because Crawford hadn’t filed a formal charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), she hadn’t yet “participated in an investigation” under the Title VII requirements.
The Supreme Court disagreed, holding that Crawford’s participation in the internal investigation was indeed protected opposition of discrimination. The fact that she had responded to someone else’s questions, rather than provoking the discussion herself, didn’t change the fact that her statements were made in opposition to perceived sexual harassment in the workplace.
The matter has now been reversed and sent back to the Sixth Circuit. Read the full text of Crawford v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson Cty