Last month, the Supreme Court ruled in Staub v. Proctor Hospital(pdf) that an employer in an employment discrimination case can be liable for the discriminatory animus of an employee who influences, but does not make, the ultimate employment decision at issue. Known as the “cat’s paw” theory, it already is having an impact on
Scared of Liability for FMLA Retaliation? Beware of Bingo Workers!
Employers increasingly are finding federal courts to be receptive forums for the consideration of an employee’s retaliation claim. In Burlington Northern v. White, for instance, the Supreme Court held that an employer can retaliate within the meaning of Title VII with actions short of terminations and other ultimate employment actions. Last year, in Crawford v.
Appeals Court Rejects Claim For Long-Term Intermittent Leave
Managing long-term intermittent leave has long been one of the central problems for employers administering FMLA leave. Particularly problematic is the employee who presents a certification suggesting that he or she will need unscheduled leave with little or no notice to the employer over a period of months or years based upon self-diagnosed, unverifiable symptoms
Employee Can Advance FMLA Claim Even Though Leave Not Taken
In a ruling that broadens employee protections under the Family and Medical Leave Act, a federal appellate court recently held that an employee may advance FMLA interference and retaliation claims even when the employee requested but did not take FMLA leave. Erdman v. Nationwide Insurance Company (pdf).
The Facts
In Erdman, the plaintiff requested