Title VII prohibits retaliation against an individual or employee that reports, protest or opposes a discriminatory practice (or at least what is reasonably and in good faith believed to be a discriminatory practice) directed at herself or others. But in the real world individually is rarely craft their statements knowingly within legal confines, so one issue can arise in retaliation cases regarding whether or not discrimination was truly protested or if the statement(s) were simply more of a general nature.
The Sixth Circuit had cause recently to consider in Yazdian v. ConMed Endoscopic Technologies Inc. whether the plaintiff's statements amounted to protected activity. In the course of reversing a summary judgment granted by the district court, the court cited the following as "individually and together qualify[ing] As Title-VII protected activity":
- "I'm going to respond with counsel."
- "I'm going to bring you up on charges before ..."
- "Bring a lawsuit against [the supervisor]"
- "Hostile work environment."
- "I will have an attorney respond."
- "I will be responding with charges."
More generally, the court explained that "an employee who complains that an employer is creating a 'hostile work environment' engages in Title-VII-protected activity when the context objectively reveals that the employee is using the expression to complain about repeated abusive discriminatory comments or treatment."
The Sixth Circuit's opinion was authored by Circuit Judge Karen Nelson Moore, and joined by Chief Judge Guy Cole and Circuit Judge Eric L. Clay.
We have addressed other questions about retaliation on the website:
Robert L. Abell
thiswww.RobertAbellLaw.com