Supreme Court Opens Door to Retaliation Claims by Third Parties
On January 24, 2011, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down a decision that will, no doubt, reshape the world of employee retaliation claims. In Thompson v. North American Stainless, LP, Plaintiff Eric Thompson and his fiance worked for the same company. After his fiance filed filed a charge of gender discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Thompson was fired. Thompson then sued the employer and claimed that his termination was unlawful and in retailiation for his fiance’s filling of an EEOC charge.
Although lower courts ruled that Thompson could not sue because he had not been the one to file the EEOC charge, the Supreme Court disagreed and found that Thompson could sue for retaliation. The Court held that “Title VII’s antiretaliation provision is worded broadly” and that those who can sue for retaliation must be within a “zone of interests” sought to be protected by the underlying legislation. In the majority opinoin, Justice Scalia commented that: “We think it obvious that a reasonable worker might be dissuaded from engaging in protected activity if she knew that her fiancé would be fired.” As a result, the Court concluded that Thompson was within the “zone of interests” and could sue the employer for retaliation. The Court’s Opinion can be found here.