Employee retaliation claims under the Supreme Court's Burlington Northern & Sante Fe Railway Co. v. White decision Important implications for employers

Employee retaliation claims under the Supreme Court's Burlington Northern & Sante Fe Railway Co. v. White decision

Important implications for employers

Twomey

David P.

Twomey, David P.

Dept. of Business Law, Carroll School of Management

Author

text

article

2007 2007 monographic

2007

monographic

English eng

English

eng

electronic application/pdf digitized other analog

electronic

application/pdf

digitized other analog

This article explores Title's VH's anti-retaliation provision and what standard courts use to resolve employee charges of employer retaliation. These cases typically feature charges where employers demote or re-assign employees as retaliation for employee actions including organizing activities, complaints, and so forth. The circuit courts of appeal differed in their decisions and so the Supreme Court decided the Burlington Northern case, concluding that the standard for actionable retaliation is when a plaintiff shows that a reasonable employee would have found the employer's action be so materially adverse that it acts to dissuade employees from asserting statutory rights.

Business Law Review 1533-7421 40 109 117 pp. 109-117 Spring 2007

Business Law Review

1533-7421

40 109 117 pp. 109-117 Spring 2007

109 117 pp. 109-117

109

117

pp. 109-117

Spring 2007

Use of this resource is governed by the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons "Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States" (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/)

Business Law Twomeyv26p85-QC.pdf businessLawGlobalPermission.pdf businessLaw.jpg

Business Law

Twomeyv26p85-QC.pdf

businessLawGlobalPermission.pdf

businessLaw.jpg

MChB English eng

MChB

English eng

English

eng