Fire the fiancé?
April 21, 2008
An employer can’t fire a worker for filing a discrimination charge, but is her fiancé fair game?
Our biweekly sister paper, Lawyers USA, has an article on the 6th Circuit’s decision on that point in Thompson v. North American Stainless, No. 07-5040.
By a 2-1 vote, the 6th Circuit reinstated a Title VII retaliation suit brought by a man who was fired after his fiancée filed a gender discrimination charge with the EEOC. The appellate decision (PDF) apparently creates a split among the federal circuits — the dissenting judge called the holding a first and cited the 3rd, 5th and 8th Circuits as having held to the contrary, the article notes.
A federal judge in Kentucky had granted summary judgment for the employer, which claims the man was fired over performance issues.
Reversing, the 6th Circuit acknowledged that a “literal reading” of the anti-retaliation law suggests that it applies only to employees who engage in protected activity. However, the appellate court said, “such a reading … ‘defeats the plain purpose’ of Title VII. There is no doubt that an employer’s retaliation against a family member after an employee files an EEOC charge would, under [Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White], dissuade ‘reasonable workers’ from such an action.”
What do you think? And what chances would you give an “associational retaliation” claim here in the 4th Circuit?
BARBARA GRZINCIC, Managing Editor/Law
Sphere: Related ContentComments
Got something to say?