When an employee complains about discrimination or harassment — to you, to a government agency, or to someone within your business — you must treat that employee with care. If you take any action that the employee might view as punishment or retaliation for the complaint, you might find yourself on the wrong end of a lawsuit.
All employers, managers, supervisors, and human resources representatives should become familiar with the law of retaliation, because retaliation claims are becoming more and more common. And they are also becoming more costly.
Retaliation means any adverse action that you or someone who works for you takes against an employee because he or she complained about harassment or discrimination. Any negative action that would deter a reasonable employee in the same situation from making a complaint qualifies as retaliation.
Employees who participate in an investigation of any of these problems are also protected — for example, you cannot punish an employee for giving a statement to a government agency that is looking into a discrimination claim.
Even if the original complaint of discrimination or harassment turns out to be unfounded, an employee who can prove that something negative happened because of the complaint can still win a retaliation claim. You also may not punish employees for participating in an internal investigation of harassment.
Adverse action includes demotion, discipline, firing, salary reduction, negative evaluation, change in job assignment, or change in shift assignment. Retaliation can also include hostile behavior or attitudes — by you or someone who works for you — toward an employee who complains. Sometimes, an employee can claim retaliation if another employee complains. For example, the Supreme Court has held that a man who was fired shortly after his fiance (who worked for the same employer) filed a discrimination charge could sue for retaliation.
Although retaliation obviously includes any action that you take with the intent to harm or punish the employee for complaining, it can also include actions that you take with the best of intentions, if those actions have a negative impact on the employee.
In both of the above examples, the employer made the mistake of focusing on the complaining employee rather than focusing on the wrongdoer. When someone complains about something unlawful in the workplace, the employer’s job is to fix the problem — not avoid it by removing the complaining employee from the situation. By changing the job conditions of the employee who complained, the employer took actions that could be viewed as retaliatory.
As soon as someone complains about discrimination or harassment in the workplace, you must take some precautionary steps:
An adverse action is retaliatory only if it is taken because the employee complained. You are free to take actions against an employee for other reasons, even if that employee has complained about discrimination or harassment.
The problem for employers is that some employees will claim that these adverse actions are retaliation, even if they have nothing to do with the employee’s complaint.
If you must take adverse action against an employee who has complained, be prepared to show that you had valid reasons for discipline, unrelated to the complaint. Those reasons should be supported, if possible, by prior documented warnings to the employee.
Back to Employment Law