Supreme Court Expands Retaliation Protection
The U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that Title VII’s anti-retaliation protections cover employees who answer questions during an internal investigation (Crawford v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee).
The Facts
An employee complained about sexual harassment by a supervisor. During the internal investigation into the complaint, another employee (Crawford) told the employer that she, too, had been sexually harassed by the supervisor.
The company later terminated Crawford for alleged embezzlement. Crawford sued, claiming retaliation.
The Ruling
The Court held that Crawford’s conduct was protected under Title VII’s “opposition clause,” which forbids employers from retaliating against employees who oppose practices that are unlawful under Title VII. In short, the Court concluded that even thought Crawford was merely responding to questions and didn’t actually trigger the investigation — her actions were sufficient to constitute “opposing” the supervisor’s alleged discrimination.
The Court found that there is “no reason to doubt that a person can ‘oppose’ by responding to someone else’s question just as surely as by provoking the discussion, and nothing in the statute requires a freakish rule protecting an employee who reports discrimination on her own initiative but not one who reports the same discrimination in the same words when her boss asks a question.”
What Does This Mean for Employers?
The Court’s decision gives employers a good road map for avoiding investigation pitfalls. Employers should:
- promptly and thoroughly investigate ALL claims of discrimination/harassment;
- inform employees that they will not be retaliated against for opposing discrimination/harassment or for participating in an investigation; and
- avoid retaliating against any employee who opposes discrimination/harassment or participates in an investigation.
Click here to read the Court’s full opinion.