The Supreme Court unanimously ruled today in Thompson v. North American Stainless that the anti-retaliation provisions in Title VII protect the fiancee of an employee that filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC and the fiancee may sue the company for wrongful termination. The Court's ruling comes nearly 8 years after the events giving rise to the lawsuit occurred.
Eric Thompson's fiancee, Miriam Regalado, filed a charge of sex discrimination against North American Stainless with the EEOC in February 2003. Three weeks later, it fired Thompson, who was also an employee. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky at Frankfort dismissed Thompson's case, ruling that Title VII offered no protection for third-party retaliation. As earlier reported on this blog, Employer's Retaliation Against Fiancee of Employee Charging Discrimination Violates Title VII, a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed and reinstated Thompson's lawsuit. Then, as also earlier reported on this blog, Retaliation Prohibitions Narrowed by Sixth Circuit, the Sixth Circuit en banc by a 10-6 vote affirmed the district court's decision and limited Title VII's anti-retaliation protections.
The Supreme Court found "little difficulty" in concluding that Thompson's firing violated Title VII's antiretaliation provisions, reasoning "it obvious that a reasonable worker might be dissuaded from engaging in protected activity if she knew that her fiance would be fired."
Thompson could file suit under Title VII for his firing because he "falls within the zone of interests protected by Title VII" since its purpose "is to protect employees from their employers' unlawful actions."
So, some 8 years after he was fired, Eric Thompson may now go forward to trial on his wrongful termination claim.
