By now, most employers are aware that Title VII prohibits:

• discrimination against employees based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin;
• discrimination against employees who oppose a Title VII violation or participate in an investigation, charge, proceeding, etc. involving an alleged Title VII violation; and
• retaliation against employees based on their protected activity.

Many employers, however, may not be aware that Title VII may also prohibit discrimination or retaliation based on an employee’s “association” with a person who is in a protected class or who has participated in protected activity.

In Holcomb v. Iona College, a white basketball coach claimed that he was fired because his wife is black.  The Second Circuit ruled in favor of the coach, finding that “an employer may violate Title VII if it takes action against an employee because of the employee’s association with a person of another race.” 

The Court stated that ”when an employee is subjected to adverse action because an employer disapproves of interracial association, the employee suffers discrimination because of the employee’s own race.”  It also emphasized that a plaintiff is not required to show that discrimination was the sole motivation behind the employer’s actions.

In Thompson v. North American Stainless, the Sixth Circuit ruled that a male employee who was fired after his co-worker fiancee filed a discrimination charge with the EEOC could be entitled to relief under Title VII.  The court found that Title VII prohibits employers from “taking retaliatory action against employees not directly involved in protected activity, but who are so closely related to or associated with those who are directly involved, that it is clear that the protected activity motivated the employer’s action.”

The court conceded that its ruling might not be supported by a “literal reading” of the statute but ultimately found that any contrary ruling would “defeat the plain purpose” of the statute.

What Does This Mean?

As always, employers should ensure that all employment decisions — particularly terminations — are based on purely legitimate non-discriminatory reasons.  In light of the above cases, employers should consider potential “associational’ discrimination claims as part of their analysis.  This is especially true where spouses, fiancees and other close relatives are employed by the same company.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, April 30th, 2008 at 7:39 am and is filed under Associational Discrimination, Discrimination, Employment Law News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.