Takeaway: In 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court created a flexible standard for showing a materially adverse action to support a retaliation claim. Despite that flexibility, some seemingly harmful decisions have not qualified as adverse actions under the Supreme Court's standard.
The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld the dismissal of a plaintiff's claims at summary judgment that stemmed from when she was reprimanded and fired after reporting sexual harassment.
The plaintiff began working at the Jesse Brown Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center in Chicago as a medical instrument technician in 2006. She assisted physicians during colonoscopies and endoscopies, stocked the procedure room with sterile instruments and interacted with patients.
The plaintiff began treatment for adjustment disorder, anxiety and depressed mood in 2016. In August 2016, a patient sent the VA a letter complaining about how the plaintiff had treated him. The plaintiff's supervisor issued her an admonishment for unprofessional and inappropriate conduct, which was later reduced to a written letter of counseling. In September 2016, the plaintiff requested an accommodation of four weeks of leave to address her mental health.
Thereafter, the plaintiff engaged in, and was the victim of, workplace misconduct. In the fall of 2016, a VA employee who was dating the plaintiff's second-level supervisor made sexual remarks to her. She complained to VA management about the comments.
In...
QUEENSLAND— A nurse in Australia has been formally reprimanded after admitting he submitted forged documents to Qantas (QF) in an attempt to secure a refund for a non-refundable airline ticket. Th...