Job transfer as the basis of a discrimination lawsuit and the burden of proof for whistleblowers in retaliation cases are among a handful of issues with workplace implications featured in the upcoming US Supreme Court term.
The justices have already agreed to hear arguments in disputes touching on what job actions can give rise to bias claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and the burden-shifting framework for plaintiffs suing under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act’s whistleblower-protection provision. The court’s decision in another case before it could significantly curtail the regulatory power of federal agencies, including those enforcing labor and employment laws.
Here’s how the cases have the potential to shift employment law.
In Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, U.S., the justices are set to determine whether job transfers and denials of requests to change positions can form the basis of a Title VII claim when they don’t impose “materially significant disadvantages” on employees.
A growing number of federal appellate courts are undoing decades-old tests for Title VII lawsuits that filtered out allegations involving adverse job actions that weren’t considered illegal.
The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled that police sergeant Jatonya Clayborn Muldrow couldn’t hold St. Louis accountable under Title VII because her rank,...
New Delhi: Ahead of the West Bengal Assembly elections, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, while addressing a rally, stated that Mahatma Gandhi had returned his knighthood in protest agai...