Post by jeffolie on Jun 25, 2013 6:42:08 GMT -6
Supreme Court ruling tightens causation rules for retaliation
June 24, 2013
In a case legal experts describe as a victory for employers, plaintiffs will have a more difficult time proving retaliation as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s divided ruling in case brought by a Texas physician.
The high court held in its 5-4 ruling Monday in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar that a defendant is not liable for an action if he would have taken the same action anyway for other, nondiscriminatory reasons. It rejected the standard that requires a plaintiff to prove only that discrimination was a motivating factor for an adverse employment action.
The ruling reversed a decision by a panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.
Lessening the causation rules in cases of wrongful employer conduct prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 could “contribute to the filing of frivolous clams, which would siphon resources from efforts by employer, administrative agencies and courts to combat workplace harassment,” said the majority opinion.
Unfair treatment based on background alleged
In the underlying case, Dr. Nassar, an assistant professor at the Dallas-based medical school, felt that his supervisor, Dr. Beth Levine, treated him unfairly because of his Middle Eastern background. Dr. Nassar sought the same job at Parkland Hospital in Dallas, with which the medical school was affiliated.
However, an affiliation agreement between the medical school and the hospital, as well as the hospital’s rules, required that a physician seeking regular employment within the hospital’s geography be employed by the medical school. Based on this agreement, the medical center’s chair of internal medicine, Dr. Gregory Fitz, refused to hire Dr. Nassar, according to the medical center’s petition.
www.businessinsurance.com/article/20130624/NEWS07/130629933