An employer was deemed liable for retaliating against a worker by suspending and transferring him after he reported unlawful harassment. A lack of hostility, animosity, or ill intent was irrelevant.
WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT…The MCAD found that transferring an employee on the same day he formally complained about being threatened and called a slur is reasonably experienced by a victim as punitive and has the effect of dissuading an employee from coming forward with a complaint of discrimination and harassment. Under Massachusetts law, if someone discharges, expels, or otherwise discriminates against an employee for engaging in protected conduct, it does not matter whether the employer intended to punish or was benign, like avoiding disruption in the flow of business or protecting the harassed employee from the harasser. The inquiry is simple: but for the employee’s complaint (or participation in a discrimination case), would the employer have taken the adverse action? The employer’s lack of hostility, animosity, and ill intent is irrelevant.
Comments