Takeaway: Because retaliation is prohibited by a number of different laws, employers must be aware of the risk of a retaliation claim any time an adverse action is taken against an employee who has recently engaged in protected activity. Employers should consider instituting a policy against retaliation and provide training to supervisors to help them recognize and avoid adverse actions.
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employer retaliated against an employee by not hiring him at its subsidiary, based on the employer's anticipation that he would testify in a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective action against the company. The FLSA prohibits discrimination against any employee because such employee has testified or is about to testify in any proceeding under the act.
The employee had previously worked for the employer. In 2019, a former co-worker filed a FLSA collective action lawsuit against the company, alleging that it failed to pay him and similarly situated employees required overtime pay. Because he was a similarly situated employee, the plaintiff was a putative member of the class action, even though he had not yet filed a consent to join the lawsuit.
Later that year, the employee applied to work for a subsidiary of the company. Both the employer and its subsidiary were aware that the employee was a putative member of the class action and a possible witness. A hiring manager sent the employee a text message saying that, although the plaintiff...
Healthcare A New England nursing home group, its owner, and an executive agreed to pay $1 million to settle allegations first brought by a whistleblower that they billed Medicare and Medicaid for...