Title: WORKPLACE RETALIATION: DONT SHOOT THE COMPLAINER
1WORKPLACE RETALIATION DONT SHOOT THE
COMPLAINER
- Colleen M. Regan, Esq.
- McGuireWoods, LLP
- Los Angeles, CA
2Workplace Retaliation
- What is it?
- How does it occur?
- The employees perspective
- The employers perspective
- Recent cases
3To retaliate
- Get even
- Get back at
- Take revenge for a perceived wrong
- Avenge
- To return like for like, especially evil for
evil
4Legal retaliation
- Generally, employers can control workplace
conduct - Adverse employment action (e.g., discipline) is
the expected consequence for bad behavior
5ILLEGAL Retaliation in Employment
- An employee suffers
- -- illegal retaliation
- when he or she is
- -- harmed
- as a consequence of exercising a
- -- legally protected right
6ILLEGAL Retaliation in Employment
- Violate a work rule, expect to be punished
- Engage in protected conduct, you cannot legally
be punished
7ILLEGAL Retaliation in Employment
- Unlawful retaliation occurs when an employer
takes a punitive or - adverse action
- against an employee
- in response to
- the employee engaging in
- protected activity
8General Areas of Protected Activity
- Expressing concerns about issues in the workplace
- Participation in or cooperation with
investigations of workplace issues - Personal life and conduct
9PROTECTED ACTIVITY (PA)
- An employee engages in protected activity when
he or she - Opposes illegal activity by employer or makes a
good faith complaint against employer, - Participates in an investigation concerning
alleged illegal activity, or - Asserts a protected right.
10Opposes illegal activity
- An employee is protected if he/she, for example
- Objects to what the employee believes to be
illegal conduct, for example - Discrimination or harassment
- Improper pay practices
- Violation of health and safety laws
- Fraud or illegal cover up
- Illegal pollution
- Agitates for compliance with safety laws
- Refuses to work in violation of wage and hour
laws
11Makes a complaint
- An employee is protected if he/she, for example
- Files a discrimination or harassment charge
- (internally or publicly)
- Seeks workers compensation benefits
- Files a wage claim
- Calls OSHA to report a safety violation
- Becomes a whistleblower
-
12Participates in an investigation
- An employee is protected, for example, if he/she
- Is interviewed in an investigation
- Gives a statement
- Testifies
- Assists or sides with a complaining employee
- Participates in any way in a court or
administrative proceeding
13Asserts a protected right
- An employee is protected if he/she exercises any
legal right or duty that the employer has no
right to interfere with, for example - Takes a legally mandated leave of absence (e.g.,
FMLA) - Requests a reasonable accommodation for a
disability (ADA) - Takes time off to vote or serve as a juror
- Participates in union organizing activity
- Takes mandatory meal and rest breaks
14ADVERSE ACTION (AA)
- A negative change in a term or condition of
employment, for example - Firing or demotion
- Reduction in benefits
- Change in shift or hours of work
- Negative evaluation or review
- Additional or fewer job responsibilities
- Unfair reprimands
- Withdrawal of support
15ADVERSE ACTION (AA)
- Does not necessarily have to be conduct affecting
the employees work life can be conduct that
would cause a reasonable employee to refrain from
engaging in the PA - Has the likely effect of restraining the exercise
of PA, and causes harm
16AA in RESPONSE to PA
- Employee has to prove causal connection
- AA would not have happened but for PA
- Proved directly
- manager admits he or she was retaliating
- Proved indirectly
- Circumstances suggest retaliatory motive
17How do you prove motive?
- Managers will rarely admit they are retaliating
- Look at circumstantial evidence
- Closeness in time between PA and AA
- Inconsistent management actions
- Evidence that management is lying or covering up
- Inconsistent reasons given by management
18Retaliatory motive
- Does retaliation have to be the only motivating
factor? - NO
- usually, just a motivating factor in deciding
to take AA against the employee
19Burden shifting analysis
- If employee proves
- AA
- In response to
- PA
- Burden shifts to employer to show
- Legitimate, nondiscriminatory business reason for
the AA - Burden shifts back to employee to prove
- Supposed business reason is just a pretext
20Employers Defenses
- No causation
- The PA had nothing to do with the decision to
impose AA (no causation) - It was going to happen anyway, whether or not the
employee engaged in PA - Employee was already scheduled for demotion poor
performance review already written etc.
21Employees Perspective
- Employees know they have rights and want to enjoy
them - Employees want to be treated fairly
- Employees want their co-employees to be treated
fairly
22Employees Perspective
- May be bothered or concerned by a perceived wrong
- Unfair discrimination or harassment
- Safety violation
- May want to take advantage of a legal right
- Seek accommodation for a disability
- Take FMLA leave
23Employees Perspective
- May fear retaliation if complains or assists
complainer - If experiences AA, likely to feel injured,
disappointed and angry - May file charge or lawsuit to protest or correct
AA
24Employers Perspective
- Most employers want to treat employees fairly and
legally - May be unaware of conduct employee is complaining
about - May be unaware that retaliation is unlawful
25Employers Perspective
- Who likes complaints?
- Once a discrimination or harassment claim is
made, it must be investigated - Time-consuming
- Distracting
- Expensive
-
26Employers Perspective
- Employer (manager) may feel betrayed by
complaining employee, particularly if the
complaint turns out to be groundless, i.e., there
was no discrimination or harassment, or safety
violation, occurring - Thus, the urge to get even, and return like
for like
27What Should Employers Do?
- Establish a policy against retaliation
- Educate managers about law of retaliation
- Give employees permission to express complaints
- Be cautious about imposing AA soon after PA
- Keep accurate and complete documentation
28Examples of unlawful workplace retaliation
- Dr. Smith sends a letter to the managers of the
clinic where he works, complaining that there are
not enough supplies and the treatment rooms are
not kept clean. Management of the clinic fires
Dr. Smith.
29Examples of unlawful workplace retaliation
- Dr. Smith sends a letter to the managers of the
clinic where he works, complaining that there are
not enough supplies and the treatment rooms are
not kept clean. Management of the clinic
transfers Dr. Smith to another clinic twenty
miles further from his home.
30Examples of unlawful workplace retaliation
- Jane tells her supervisor that she believes a
co-worker is being unfairly treated on account of
his race. The complaint is investigated and no
discrimination is found. Jane receives a written
reprimand for having brought a false charge.
This contributes to Jane not getting an expected
promotion. Jane sues, claiming she suffered
retaliation for having reported her suspicion of
discrimination.
31Examples of unlawful workplace retaliation
- Store manager, Alice, is performing poorly at her
job. Company officials meet and decide to
terminate her. Several days later, the furnace
at the store malfunctions, releasing noxious
fumes. Alice becomes ill, leaves the store and
files a claim with OSHA. Upon her return to
work, she is fired.
32Examples of unlawful workplace retaliation
- Frank complains that his supervisor is sexually
harassing him. In response, the company changes
Franks schedule so that he works the night
shift, rather than the day shift. Frank thus
avoids the harassing supervisor, but Frank
prefers to work the day shift so he can spend
evenings with his family.
33RECENT CASES
- Burlington Northern Santa Fe RR v. White, June
22, 2006 U.S. Supreme Court. - Title VII if AA would prevent a reasonable
employee from pursuing the PA, it is sufficiently
severe to state a claim - Changed the standard in several circuits
34RECENT CASES
- Yanowitz v. LOreal USA, Inc., 36 Cal. 4th 1028
(2005). - FEHA (California) Even though employee did not
complain about the conduct, the employer should
have known that the employee was objecting to
what she perceived to be illegal discrimination
35RECENT CASES
- Washington v. Illinois Dept. of Revenue, 420 F.3d
658 (7th Cir. 2005) - Flextime critical to employee with a child with a
disability - Wright v. CompUSA, Inc., 352 F.3d 472 (1st Cir.
2003) - Employee with ADD requested accommodation and was
fired had a viable claim that he was fired in
retaliation for requesting accommodation. - Immigration cases
- Even undocumented workers have a right to be free
of retaliation for complaining of illegal wage
payments
36In California, TORTIOUS retaliatory discharge
- Tort damages available
- Termination in violation of
- A statute or regulation
- Public policy
- For exercising legal rights, e.g.,
- Discussing compensation
- Complaining of smoking in the workplace
- Engaging in political activities
- Refusing to sign a non-compete agreement
37In California, TORTIOUS retaliatory discharge
- Not every legal right gives rise to a claim for
TORTIOUS retaliatory discharge. The following do
not. - Exercising First Amendment rights over employer
objections (e.g., newspaper reporter) - Asserting Fifth Amendment during internal
investigation - Preparing to work for a competitor
- Right to be free from libel
38How to eliminate workplace retaliation
- Education of supervisors goes a long way to
prevent unnecessary claims - Communication engenders trust
- Thank you for joining us!