« In the midst of moving | Main | An Interesting Idea: making law by contract »

Supreme Court will decide on the meaning of "retaliation"

The New York Times reported on 6 December 2005: For more than 40 years, federal law has prohibited employers from retaliating against employees who complain about discrimination on the job. But neither Congress, which included the anti-retaliation protection in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, nor the Supreme Court has ever defined "retaliation."

On Monday, the justices agreed to provide the definition, accepting a case that began in a Memphis rail yard when the only woman working in the maintenance department there complained about sexual harassment by her supervisor.

Within 10 days, the woman, Sheila White, was transferred from her assignment operating a forklift to the less desirable position, within the same job classification, of working outdoors on the tracks.

Three months later, after she filed a formal complaint with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, her employer, the Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Company, suspended her without pay. After a union grievance, she was restored to the payroll with back pay after 37 days.

The question for the court is whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in Cincinnati, correctly concluded that those events amounted to the type of retaliation that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits. The appeals court upheld a jury award of $43,250 in compensatory damages to Ms. White. -- For the whole story from the NY Times, go to Court to Rule on What Constitutes Employer Retaliation - New York Times

This entry was posted by Edward at 7:30 AM, 06 December 2005 | Categories: Recent news

The picture above was made in 1914 by the Birmingham Engraving Co. This reproduction is from the Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA.

Information about ...

Contact me
Edward Still Law Firm, LLC
130 Wildwood Parkway
Suite 108 PMB 304
Birmingham AL 35209
tel & fax: 205-320-2882

View Edward Still's profile on LinkedIn

Legal Notices

The Alabama Rules of Professional Responsibility require this statement: "No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers."


Recently Changed Information on this Page

Entire site copyright (c) 2005-14 Edward Still. See the Creative Commons license below.

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Powered by
Movable Type 3.35

Hosted by Hosting Matters


Click below to move to a news feed:
Workplace Fairness
Legal News from Jurist
Constitution Newswire