Takeaway: While the employer ultimately prevailed in this matter, this is an example of how insensitive comments can light the fuse for litigation that wended its way through one administrative agency and two levels of federal court, creating expenses in time, money and business disruptions.

Telling an individual to "act a little more masculine" or to remove a Facebook status indicating a sexual orientation is unlikely to relate to any legitimate business reason. Even if the remarks do not lead directly to a material adverse employment action, the statements themselves can be understood as disrespectful. Employers should recognize the need for inclusive leadership training and for supporting the use of thoughtful communication techniques by supervisors in order to avoid becoming involved in a lawsuit, whether those claims ultimately are successful or not.

Conclusory allegations of gender discrimination are not sufficient to allow a plaintiff to survive summary judgment, according to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

In order to overcome a motion for summary judgment in a gender discrimination lawsuit brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a plaintiff must present evidence sufficient for a rational jury to find that the plaintiff suffered an adverse employment action because of prohibited discrimination. In other words, the presence of prohibited discrimination without evidence of a material adverse employment action based upon that discrimination is...

Read Full Story: https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pa...