I don’t know much about workers’ compensation.
Apart from a few standard provisions that I have in my employment settlement agreements, I know just enough about it to call a workers’ comp lawyer when I have an issue.
Or, like today, I know just enough that a workers’ comp decision involving a man who died during sex with a French local while on a business trip (RIP) is something that my readers want to read.
I’ve talked a fair amount recently about retaliation claims (here and here), mostly focusing on timing as the possible link between a protected activity (such as a complaint of discrimination) and an adverse employment action (like a firing).
The plaintiffs in those cases were unsuccessful in proving retaliation. And, in the case about which I’m blogging today, the employer almost prevailed on summary judgment too.
Almost. Continue reading
Last week, I blogged about a situation in which two employees alleged that their former employer retaliated against them for participating in a workplace investigation. Each claimed that the close timing between the investigation and their subsequent firing confirmed that there must have been some retaliatory animus.
They were wrong.
What I have for you today is another similar situation. This time, we have an employee who complained about a supervisor’s sexual harassment. The company investigated. Then, it fired the supervisor and promoted the victim to supervisor. And then promoted her again. But, later, the company fired the victim. Continue reading
This isn’t going away any time soon.
You’ve been here before.
One of your employees just complained about discrimination in the workplace. Or maybe s/he just participated in an HR investigation. A few days or weeks later, s/he violates your work rules and you have clear grounds to fire the employee.
Now you have a conundrum. Do you fire the employee and risk the retaliation claim? Or do you give the employee a pass?