Tag: Title VII

“Sleeping Her Way to the Top”: How Female Employees May Have a Claim for Sex Discrimination Under Title VII Based on False Rumors About Sleeping With a Supervisor

Successful women, especially in male-dominated professions, are well-acquainted with this accusation. It’s humiliating on numerous levels, but perhaps most damaging is the suggestion that the woman didn’t actually earn the position she achieved. Continue reading ““Sleeping Her Way to the Top”: How Female Employees May Have a Claim for Sex Discrimination Under Title VII Based on False Rumors About Sleeping With a Supervisor”

Pregnant Workers Fairness Act: Proposed Bill Extends Protection for Pregnant Women

Currently, pregnant women are a protected class under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, an Amendment to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The new bill would extend protection to female employees with pregnancy-related work limitations, forcing employers to make reasonable accommodations and preventing them from terminating pregnant women due to inhibited performance. For more information related to Pregnancy Discrimination and the proposed law visit these links:
Pregnancy Discrimination Act (Current Law)
Facts on the Pregnancy Discrimination Act
Pregnant Workers Fairness Act: Proposed Language
New York Times Article on Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

When is Third Party Retaliation an Actionable Claim?

The Supreme Court has held that an employer can be found liable for terminating an employee when that employee’s fiance has engaged in a protected activity (Opposing discrimination, complaining about harassment, etc.) under Title VII (Discrimination). So what relationship needs to exist between the Third Party and the individual engaging in the protective activity to have an actionable claim? The Supreme Court has provided a factor test: Justice Scalia suggests that there are two factors that determine whether third-party retaliation is unlawful under Title VII: 1. The nature of the relationship; and 2. The severity of the employer’s action. Thus, he states: “We expect that firing a close family member will almost always meet the Burlington standard, and inflicting a milder reprisal on a mere acquaintance will almost never do so.” Read more on Unlawful Third Party Retaliation.