The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit determined an employee who questioned his former company's COVID-19 policies during the pandemic had engaged in protected activity, concluding there was sufficient evidence he was improperly fired because of his criticisms and questions.

In a Monday decision, the appellate court ruled in favor of a former employee of a Pittsburgh-area plastics company who was allegedly fired after expressing concerns about the company's COVID-19 policies during the pandemic. The court partially denied petitioner Miller Plastic Products' motion for review of the National Labor Relations Board's decision finding the employee, Ronald Vincer, was fired during the early weeks of the pandemic for conduct protected under the National Labor Relations Act.

The three-judge panel agreed with the board and granted its cross-application for enforcement, concluding there was sufficient evidence supporting that Vincer's concern and questioning of Miller Plastic's COVID-19 policies were protected and were a motivating factor in the decision to terminate him.

"The company’s knowledge of Vincer’s protected activity, coupled with a change in its response to Vincer’s problematic behavior mere days after the protected activity, and the absence of any investigation, analysis, or documentation in his personnel file to otherwise explain the termination, constitutes substantial circumstantial evidence that the protected activity was at least a motivating factor in...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMi5wFBVV95cUxQWmVOcnRVaUJuM0N0SVhObmw0...