Discrimination and Unlawful Harassment

POLL RESULTS: Here’s what you said about the #Donglegate firing

March 28, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

For much of the week, I’ve blogged about Adria Richards, the employee who got fired for tweeting complaints about discrimination. On Monday, I offered my legal analysis (here).

On Tuesday, I followed that up with this simple poll that purported to remove the law from the equation: Was the decision of Ms. Richards’s employer, SendGrid, to fire her “fair” or “unfair”? “Fair” and “unfair” were the only two answers and they were randomized such that either one could have appeared as the top choice when taking the poll.

Now the results are in. 129 of you responded and 70 of you (54%) said that the firing was fair. 59 respondents indicated that the firing was unfair (46%).

POLL: Was the #Donglegate firing fair?

March 26, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

Whew!

Got a little carried away with yesterday’s post about the employee who got fired for tweeting complaints about discrimination, didn’t I?

Then again, I’m not the one who came up with the hashtag #donglegate.

Employee gets fired for tweeting complaints about discrimination

March 25, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

Is this Retaliation 2.0?

Two weeks ago, Adria Richards attended an industry conference at which she overheard sexual jokes from two attendees sitting behind her during a session. So, she complained…on Twitter:

Not cool.Jokes about forking repo’s in a sexual way and “big” dongles.Right behind me #pycon twitter.com/adriarichards/…

— Adria Richards (@adriarichards) March 17, 2013

And then she blogged about it here. The social-media complaints resulted in one of the joke tellers getting fired. And, last Wednesday, Ms. Richards tweeted that her employer supported her.

Hey @mundanematt, it’s clear from the last 24 hours you’re a bully.@sendgrid supports me.Stop trolling.

— Adria Richards (@adriarichards) March 20, 2013

That same day, SendGrid, Ms. Richards’s employer, fired her.

(Jon Brodkin at arstechnica.com has the full story here).

We can argue about the propriety of using social media to publicize a harassment complaint, especially when a private complaint could have sufficed. Still, the SendGrid response certainly seems harsh and unfair.

But did SendGrid go so far as to retaliate (as a matter of law) against Ms. Richards?

Find out, after the jump…

* * *

Firing for *&$%-laced Facebook post is not reverse-race discrimination, you guys

March 22, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

School teacher, Lawrence Smizer, is a regular Facebook wordsmith:

To all my family that fought my sister tooth and nail over some BULLSHIT (And you know who you are) FUCK YOU BITCHES!!!! HE IS GOING HOME WHERE HE BELONGS!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHA AHAH HAHAH HAAH

Smizer was Facebook friends with two co-workers. They dimed him out to the school and Smizer was fired. So, he sued for reverse-race discrimination.

Reverse-race discrimination, mmm-kay. How do you think it worked out for him?

Find out after the jump…

* * *

Supreme Court to tackle age discrimination

March 19, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

Sorry for the late post gang. Rough night last night.

Today, I’m punting the ball over to my blogging buddy Phil Miles at Lawffice Space who has the scoop on a new age-discrimination matter that the Supreme Court has agreed to address. You can read Phil’s post here.

Is rejecting a sexual advance, without reporting it, protected activity?

March 18, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

Of all employment claims presented to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, retaliation numero uno. It’s been that way since 2010.

There are three essential elements of a retaliation claim: (1) protected activity — opposition to discrimination or participation in the statutory complaint process; (2) adverse action; and (3) causal connection between the protected activity and the adverse action.

This post focuses on “opposition to discrimination.” Specifically, is withdrawing from what one perceives to be a sexual advance by one’s employer opposition to discrimination and, thus, a protected activity?

The answer after the jump…

* * *

An EEOC complaint is not your free pass to goof off at work

March 11, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

Or sexually harass your co-workers.

Unless, of course, you consider my working Hollywood manuscript: “An EEOC Complaint Is Your Free Pass to Sexually Harass.” I know, the title needs work, but with ~~C. Thomas Howell~~, ~~Tawny Kitaen~~ real star power and a producer.

** Immediately regrets sixth shot of Drambuie with breakfast **

There’s a point to all of this, and some employer tips too, after the jump…

* * *

In 77 tweets, what employers can learn about EEOC enforcement #EEOCHR

March 7, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

I had two topics on the brain to blog about:

Whether, under the Americans with Disabilities Act, being on time is an essential function of the job. Fortunately, Daniel Schwartz addressed that yesterday here at the Connecticut Employment Law Blog.
As a follow-up to yesterday’s wage-and-hour / Daylight Savings Time post, exploring how DST impacts tracking intermittent leave taken under the Family and Medical Leave Act.

{Go take a bath right now to cleanse yourself of the employment-law dorkness that hit you from reading No. 2}

Instead, after the jump, I have, well, you read the title to this post. These are my tweets (and several retweets) from the “EEOC Overview and HR Mixer” I attended yesterday — hashtag #ubernerd #EEOCHR

{Better grab the soap and turn on that bath again. You’ve been warned.}

* * *

How can the EEOC improve? Tweet your feedback with hashtag #QCP

March 1, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

Thumbnail image for EEOC.jpg

Earlier this month, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued this press release in which it sought your feedback to improve its internal processes for investigating and conciliating charges of discrimination.

Well, the deadline is today.

Eek! Sorry, I ~~got distracted remastering goat remixes~~ should have reminded you earlier.

Repeatedly discussing your employee’s sex life with her is bad, you guys.

February 26, 2013 | by Eric B. Meyer

Duh, right?

Still, a federal appellate court recently reminded us (here) that, indeed, bad things happen when, every week for several months, a male supervisor tells his female subordinate that her husband is “not taking care of [her] in bed.”

Though not threatening, they were more than merely offensive. For a male to say to a female employee under his supervision that her husband was “not taking care of [her] in bed” is the sort of remark that can readily be found to be a solicitation for sexual relations coupled with a claim of sexual prowess and can just as readily be found to have been perceived as such by the female employee. The weekly repetition of such a remark over several weeks only served to reenforce its offensive meaning and to make sexual intimidation, ridicule, and insult a pervasive part of Desardouin’s workplace, effectively changing the terms and conditions of her employment….The allegations of repeated solicitation of sexual relations in a vulgar and humiliating manner suffice to warrant a trial.