The Minnesota Court of Appeals has decertified a class-action lawsuit brought by 4,900 current and former Minnesota employees of 3M. The suit alleged that company policies, seemingly neutral, actually had a disparate impact on older workers.
Employers have faced more retaliation claims ever since the U.S. Supreme Court made such cases easier to win by ruling that retaliation is an action that “might have dissuaded a reasonable worker from making or supporting a charge of discrimination.” While the federal courts have placed some limits on what constitutes a retaliatory act, they continue to struggle with the question.
It’s one of the sad realities of today’s litigious world: Even when you win a lawsuit, you’re seldom able to recoup all your legal fees unless you win big. That’s true even if your opponent is the EEOC and it’s clear it didn’t have much of a case to begin with.
Here’s a good reason to be careful about disciplining employees right after they complain about possible discrimination: A court may view the timing as so suspicious that it won’t toss out the case early. Then it will be up to you to prove the complaint and discipline weren’t related.
Employers can’t fire employees in retaliation for “blowing the whistle” on illegal activities. But Minnesota’s Whistleblower Statute doesn’t apply to workers who complain about practices they simply think are unethical.
Ellen Bahr was a supervisor for Capella University and regularly had to evaluate workers in her department. One black woman was performing far worse than the rest of the workers, so Bahr placed her on an improvement plan. Even then, the employee’s work remained below standard …
The Minnesota Legislature recently enacted a law designed to protect employers from some of the legal risks that may accompany hiring people with criminal backgrounds. The law is designed to help those who have served their sentences re-enter society as productive citizens.
Exotic dancers at suburban Minneapolis’ King of Diamonds club pay the club a fee of $20 to $100 every night they work. King of Diamonds maintains the dancers are independent contractors and “pay for the pole” in order to earn tips. The club does not pay them an hourly wage. Attorney E. Michelle Drake sees things differently.
A legal theory often referred to as the “cat’s paw” holds that an employer can be liable for hidden bias if it merely rubber stamps a subordinate’s discriminatory decision. By conducting an independent evaluation of the situation, you can cut off that liability.
Employees who want to file a discrimination complaint have to meet tight deadlines. They have just 90 days after receiving an EEOC “right-to-sue” letter to start their lawsuits. A perceived threat from an employer —such as a statement that it will “dig up” everything it can about the employee—doesn’t excuse missing the deadline.