Court Decisions

2004: Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders (542 U.S. 129)

Decision: In the absence of a tangible employment action, employers may use the Ellerth/Faragher defense in a constructive discharge claim when supervisors are charged with harassment.

2002: EEOC v. Waffle House (534 U.S. 279)

Decision: In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that even if there is a mandatory arbitration agreement in place, the relevant civil rights agency can still sue on behalf of the employee.

1995: PepsiCo, Inc. v. Redmond (No. 94-3942 7th Cir)

Decision: In this case, the district court applied the inevitable disclosure doctrine even though there was no noncompete agreement in place. An employee who had left his position in marketing PepsiCo's All Sport sports drink to work for Quaker Oats Company and market Gatorade and Snapple drinks was enjoined from working for Quaker because he had detailed knowledge of PepsiCo's trade secrets pertaining to pricing, market strategy, and selling/ delivery systems.

1978: Regents of University of California v. Bakke (438 U.S. 265)

Decision: Medical school admission set-asides (16 of 100 seats) are illegal if they discriminate against whites and there is no previous discrimination against minorities established.

1974: Espinoza v. Farah Manufacturing Co. (414 U.S. 86)

Decision: Noncitizens are entitled to Title VII protection. Employers who require citizenship may violate Title VII if it results in discrimination based on national origin.

2004: NLRB v. Weingarten, Inc. (420 U.S. 251, 254 1975)

Decision: On June 9, 2004, the NLRB ruled by a 3-2 vote that employees who work in a nonunionized workplace are not entitled to have a co-worker accompany them to an interview with their employer, even if the affected employee reasonably believes that the interview might result in discipline. This decision effectively reversed the July 2000 decision of the Clinton board, which had extended Weingarten rights to nonunion employees.

1974: Corning Glass Works v. Brennan (417 U.S. 188)

Decision: Pay discrimination cases under the Equal Pay Act require the employee to prove that there is unequal pay based on sex for substantially equal work.

1993: Taxman v. Board of Education of Piscataway (91 F.3d 1547, 3rd Circuit)

Decision: Race in an affirmative action plan cannot be used to trammel the rights of people of other races.

2013: University of Texas Sw. Med. Ctr. V. Nassar (No 12-484)

Decision: Retaliation claims brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 must be proved according to principles of "but-for-causation," not the lesser causation test applicable to bias claims.

1998: Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Service, Inc. (523 U.S. 75)

Decision: Same-gender harassment is actionable under Title VII.

1971: Phillips v. Martin Marietta Corp. (400 U.S. 542)

Decision: Sex discrimination means employers may not have different policies for men and women with small children of similar age.

2007: Syracuse University v. NLRB (350 NLRB 755)

Decision: The NLRB found that an employee grievance panel did not violate the NLRA because the purpose of the panel was not to deal with management but to improve group decisions.

1992: Electromation, Inc., v. NLRB (Nos. 92-4129, 93-1169 7th Cir)

Decision: The NLRB held that action committees at Electromation were illegal "labor organizations" because management created and controlled the groups and used them to deal with employees on working conditions in violation of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

2011: Specialty Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center of Mobile v. NLRB (15-RC-008773)

Decision: The NLRB indicated that in nonacute healthcare facilities, it will certify smaller units for bargaining unless the employer provides overwhelming proof of a community of interest.

2011: UGL-UNICCO Service Company v. NLRB (01-RC-022447)

Decision: The NLRB reestablished the successor bar doctrine, allowing unions a window of six months to one year of presumed majority support after the transfer of ownership of a business.

2010: KenMor Electric Co., Inc. v. NLRB (355 NLRB No. 173)

Decision: The NLRB ruled that a system developed and operated by an association of electrical contractors violated the NLRA because it discriminated against individuals who were salts. The board held that an individual's right to be a salt is protected under the NLRA.

2012: D. R. Horton, Inc. v. NLRB (12-CA-25764)

Decision: The NLRB ruled that requiring employees to agree to a class action waiver as a term and condition of employment violates Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act.

1984: EEOC v. Shell Oil Co. (466 U.S. 54)

Decision: The Supreme Court affirmed authority of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) commissioners to initiate charges of discrimination through "Commissioner Charges."

2011: Staub v. Proctor (131 U.S. 1186)

Decision: The Supreme Court applied the "cat's paw" principle to a wrongful discharge case, finding that an employer was culpable because the HR manager did not adequately investigate supervisors' charges against the fired employee.

1991: United Auto Workers v. Johnson Controls (499 U.S. 187)

Decision: The Supreme Court held that decisions about the welfare of future children must be left to the parents who conceive, bear, support, and raise them rather than to the employers who hire their parents.

2011: Kepas v. Ebay (131 S.Ct. 2160)

Decision: The Supreme Court refused to review a lower court decision that held in an employment case that a cost provision was severable from the balance of an arbitration agreement. The cost provision was unenforceable, but the agreement to arbitrate was enforceable.

1988: DeBartolo Corp. v. Gulf Coast Trades Council (known as DeBartolo II) (485 U.S. 568)

Decision: The Supreme Court ruled that bannering, hand billing, or attention-getting actions outside an employer's property were permissible.

2011: AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion (S.Ct. No. 09-893)

Decision: The Supreme Court ruled that some state statutes restricting the enforceability of arbitration agreements in a commercial context may be preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act.

1993: E. I. DuPont & Company v. NLRB (311 NLRB 893)

Decision: The board concluded that DuPont's six safety committees and fitness committee were employer-dominated labor organizations and that DuPont dominated the formation and administration of one of them in violation of the NLRA.

2001: Circuit City Stores v. Adams (532 U.S. 105)

Decision: The court ruled that a prehire employment application requiring that all employment disputes be settled by arbitration was enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act.

1987: Leggett v. First National Bank of Oregon (739 P.2d. 1083)

Decision: The employer invaded the privacy of the employee when a company representative contacted the employee's psychologist (to whom the employee had been referred by an employee assistance program [EAP]), inquiring about the employee's condition.

1987: Johnson v. Santa Clara County Transportation Agency (480 U.S. 616)

Decision: The employer was justified in hiring a woman who scored 2 points less than a man because it had an affirmative action plan that was temporary, flexible, and designed to correct an imbalance of white males in the workforce.

2001: Ronald Lesch v. Crown Cork and Seal Company (334 NLRB 699)

Decision: This NLRB decision lifted some restrictions on the employer's use of employee participation committees.

2007: Oil Capitol Sheet Metal, Inc. v. NLRB (349 NLRB 1348)

Decision: This NLRB decision provides employers relief in salting cases by announcing a new evidentiary standard for determining the period of back pay; it requires the union to provide evidence that supports the period of time it claims the salt would have been employed.

2007 and 2011: Dana Corporation/ Metaldyne Corporation v. NLRB (351 NLRB 434)

Decision: This NLRB ruling says that a recognition bar, which precludes a decertification election for 12 months after an employer recognizes a union, does not apply when the recognition is voluntary, based on a card check. This was overruled in 2011 in Lamons Gasket, which restored the recognition bar for voluntary recognition but revised the prohibited time period from one year to a minimum of six months up to a year.

2007: Toering Electric Company v. NLRB (351 NLRB 225)

Decision: This NLRB ruling says that an applicant for employment must be genuinely interested in seeking to establish an employment relationship with the employer in order to be protected against hiring discrimination based on union affiliation or activity; this creates greater obstacles for unions attempting salting campaigns.

2002: Phoenix Transit System v. NLRB (337 NLRB 510)

Decision: This NLRB ruling struck down an employer rule prohibiting employees from discussing among themselves an employment complaint—in this instance, a complaint of sexual harassment—on the grounds that the prohibition was not limited in time and scope and interfered with a protected concerted activity.

1995: NLRB v. Town & Country Electric (516 U.S. 85)

Decision: This Supreme Court decision related to salting held that a worker may be a company's "employee," within the terms of the National Labor Relations Act, even if, at the same time, a union pays that worker to help the union organize the company.

2013: Vance v. Ball State Univ. (No. 11-556)

Decision: This decision determined that an employee is a "supervisor" of another employee for the purposes of liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 only if he or she is empowered by the employer to take tangible employment actions against the other employee.

1998: Faragher v. City of Boca Raton (524 U.S. 775)

Decision: This decision distinguished between supervisor harassment that results in tangible employment action and that which does not. When harassment results in tangible employment action, the employer is liable. Employers may avoid liability if they have a legitimate written complaint policy, it is clearly communicated to employees, and it offers alternatives to the immediate supervisor as the point of contact for making a complaint.

1999: Gibson v. West (527 U.S. 212)

Decision: This decision endorsed the EEOC's position that it has the legal authority to require federal agencies to pay compensatory damages when the EEOC has ruled during the administrative process that the federal agency has unlawfully discriminated in violation of Title VII.

1989: Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins (490 U.S. 288)

Decision: This decision established how to analyze an employer's actions when the employer had mixed motives for an employment decision. If an employee shows that discrimination played a motivating part in an employment decision, the employer can attempt to prove as a defense that it would have made the same employment decision even if discrimination were not a factor.

1975: Albermarle Paper v. Moody (422 U.S. 405)

Decision: This decision requires an employer to establish evidence that an employment test is related to the job content. Job analysis could be used to show that relationship, but performance evaluations of incumbents are specifically excluded.

1986: Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson (477 U.S.57)

Decision: This defined "Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment" as a form of sex discrimination under Title VII. The decision further defined it as "unwelcome" advances of a sexual nature. A victim's failure to use an employer's complaint process does not insulate the employer from liability.

2009: Kennedy v. Plan Administrators for Dupont Savings (No. 07-636)

Decision: This ruling awarded retirement benefits to an ex-spouse even though she had agreed to disclaim such benefits, because the retiree had never changed the beneficiary designation on the retirement plan. This decision pointed out the need for retirement plan administrators to pay attention to divorce decrees and qualified domestic relations orders.

2005: IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez (546 U.S. 21)

Decision: Time spent donning or doffing unique safety gear is compensable, and the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) requires payment of affected employees for all the time spent walking between changing and production areas.

1993: St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks (509 U.S. 502)

Decision: Title VII complaints require the employee to show that discrimination was the reason for a negative employment action.

1997: Robinson v. Shell Oil (519 U.S. 337)

Decision: Title VII prohibition against retaliation protects former as well as current employees.

1976: McDonald v. Santa Fe Transportation Co. (427 U.S. 273)

Decision: Title VII prohibits racial discrimination against whites as well as blacks.

1999: Kolstad v. American Dental Association (527 U.S. 526)

Decision: Title VII punitive damages are limited to cases in which the employer has engaged in intentional discrimination and has done so "with malice or with reckless indifference...."

2005: Leonel v. American Airlines (400 F.3d 702, 9th Circuit)

Decision: To make a legitimate job offer under the ADA, an employer must have completed all nonmedical components of the application process or be able to demonstrate that it could not reasonably have done so before issuing the offer.

1996: O'Connor v. Consolidated Coin Caterers Corp. (517 U.S. 308)

Decision: To show unlawful discrimination under the ADEA, a discharged employee does not have to show that he or she was replaced by someone outside the protected age group (that is, younger than 40).

1977: Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison (432 U.S. 63)

Decision: Under Title VII employers must reasonably accommodate an employee's religious needs unless doing so would create an undue hardship for the employer. The Court defines hardship as anything more than de minimis cost.

1971: Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (401 U.S. 424)

Decision: When an employer uses a neutral test or other selection device and then discovers it has a disproportionate impact on minorities or women, the test must be discarded unless it can be shown that it was required as a business necessity.

1976: Washington v. Davis (426 U.S. 229)

Decision: When an employment test is challenged under constitutional law, an intent to discriminate must be established. Under Title VII there is no need to show intent, just the impact of test results.

2008: LaRue v. DeWolff (No. 06-856, 450 F. 3d 570)

Decision: When retirement plan administrators breach their fiduciary duty to act as a prudent person would act in investment of retirement funds, the employee whose retirement account lost money can sue the plan administrators.

1993: Harris v. Forklift Systems Inc. (510 U.S. 17)

Decision: In a sexual harassment complaint the employee does not have to prove concrete psychological harm to establish a Title VII violation.

1988: Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust (487 U.S. 977)

Decision: In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court declared that disparate impact analysis can be applied to subjective or discretionary selection practices.

2009: Ricci v. DeStefano (No. 07-1428)

Decision: "...under Title VII, before an employer can engage in intentional discrimination for the asserted purpose of avoiding or remedying an unintentional disparate impact, the employer must have a strong basis in evidence to believe it will be subject to disparate-impact liability if it fails to take the race-conscious, discriminatory action."

1995: McKennon v. Nashville Banner Publishing Co. (513 U.S. 352)

Decision: "After-acquired" evidence collected following a negative employment action cannot protect an employer from liability under Title VII or the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), even if the conduct would have justified terminating the employee.

2007: Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (550 U.S. 618)

Decision: A claim of discrimination must be filed within 180 days of the first discriminatory employment act, and the clock does not restart after each subsequent act (e.g., issuance of a paycheck with lower pay than co-workers if based on sex). Congress overruled this decision with the passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which says the clock will restart each time another incident of discrimination occurs.

1987: School Board of Nassau v. Arline (480 U.S. 273)

Decision: A person with a contagious disease is covered by the Rehabilitation Act if they otherwise meet the definitions of "handicapped individual."

2004: General Dynamics Land Systems, Inc. v. Cline (540 U.S. 581)

Decision: ADEA does not protect younger workers, even those older than 40, from workplace decisions that favor older workers.

2005: Smith v. Jackson, Mississippi (544 U.S. 228)

Decision: ADEA, like Title VII, offers recovery on a disparate impact theory.

1979: United Steelworkers v. Weber (443 U.S. 193)

Decision: Affirmative action plans are permissible if they are temporary and intended to "eliminate a manifest racial imbalance."

1989: City of Richmond v. J. A. Croson Company (488 U.S. 469)

Decision: Affirmative action programs can be maintained only by a showing that the programs aim to eliminate the effects of past discrimination.

1977: Hazelwood School District v. U.S. (433 U.S. 299)

Decision: An employee can establish a prima facie case of class hiring discrimination through the presentation of statistical evidence by comparing the racial composition of an employer's workforce with the racial composition of the relevant labor market.

1989: Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Antonio (490 U.S. 642)

Decision: An employee is required to show disparate impact violation of Title VII in specific employment practices, not the cumulative effect of the employer's selection practices. When a showing of disparate impact is made, the employer only has to produce evidence of a business justification for the practice, and the burden of proof always remains with the employee.

1982: Connecticut v. Teal (457 U.S. 440)

Decision: An employer is liable for racial discrimination when any part of its selection process, such as an unvalidated examination or test, has a disparate impact even if the final result of the hiring process is racially balanced. In effect, the court rejects the "bottom-line defense" and makes clear that the fair employment laws protect the individual. Fair treatment to a group is not a defense to an individual claim of discrimination.

1998: Bragdon v. Abbott (524 U.S. 624)

Decision: An individual with asymptomatic HIV is an individual with a disability and therefore is protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Reproduction is a major life activity under the statute.

1998: Wright v. Universal Maritime Service Corp. (525 U.S. 70)

Decision: Collective bargaining agreements must contain a clear and unmistakable waiver if they are to bar an individual's right to sue after an arbitration requirement.

2000: Erie County Retirees Association v. County of Erie (2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 18317 3rd Cir. August 1, 2000)

Decision: If an employee provides retiree health benefits, the health insurance benefits received by Medicare-eligible retirees cost the same as the health insurance benefits received by younger retirees.

1973: McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (411 U.S. 792)

Decision: In a hiring case, the charging party has only to show 1) the charging party is a member of a Title VII protected group, 2) he or she applied and was qualified for the position sought, 3) the job was not offered to him or her, and 4) the employer continued to seek applicants with similar qualifications. Then the employer must show a legitimate business reason why the complaining party was not hired. The employee has a final chance to prove the employer's business reason was really pretext for discrimination.