Thompson v North American Stainless LP A case about job discrimination
Thompson v. North American Stainless, LP: A case about job discrimination
What’s at stake. As in this term's , the Court’s decision is certain to apply to other federal antidiscrimination laws. Age discrimination complaints filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission have been rising for the past several years and hit in fiscal 2008. Complaints about other forms of discrimination have also been on the rise. Where AARP stands. AARP, siding with Thompson, argues that “third-party employees must be permitted to file claims to redress their own injuries.” How the Court Ruled In a unanimous decision issued on Jan. 24, the Court sided with Thompson, holding that the protections of extend to those who claim third-party retaliation. "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," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in delivering the . The Court said that its decision would almost always apply to "a close family member" but probably not to "a mere acquaintance." Cancel You are leaving AARP.org and going to the website of our trusted provider. The provider’s terms, conditions and policies apply. Please return to AARP.org to learn more about other benefits. Your email address is now confirmed. You'll start receiving the latest news, benefits, events, and programs related to AARP's mission to empower people to choose how they live as they age. You can also by updating your account at anytime. You will be asked to register or log in. Cancel Offer Details Disclosures
Thompson v North American Stainless LP A Case About Job Discrimination
Security of workers' friends and family may be at stake
Can a company legally retaliate against an employee’s friends, relatives or spouse because the employee filed a discrimination claim? That issue lies at the heart of Thompson v. North American Stainless, LP. The case was brought by Eric Thompson, who was fired from his job as a metallurgical engineer in 2003 three weeks after his employer learned that Miriam Regalado, his co-worker and then-fiancée (they’re now married), had filed a sex discrimination claim against the company. Lower courts ruled that she was protected from retaliation, but he was not.Related
Listen to the Court’s oral arguments for Thompson v. North American Stainless.What’s at stake. As in this term's , the Court’s decision is certain to apply to other federal antidiscrimination laws. Age discrimination complaints filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission have been rising for the past several years and hit in fiscal 2008. Complaints about other forms of discrimination have also been on the rise. Where AARP stands. AARP, siding with Thompson, argues that “third-party employees must be permitted to file claims to redress their own injuries.” How the Court Ruled In a unanimous decision issued on Jan. 24, the Court sided with Thompson, holding that the protections of extend to those who claim third-party retaliation. "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," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in delivering the . The Court said that its decision would almost always apply to "a close family member" but probably not to "a mere acquaintance." Cancel You are leaving AARP.org and going to the website of our trusted provider. The provider’s terms, conditions and policies apply. Please return to AARP.org to learn more about other benefits. Your email address is now confirmed. You'll start receiving the latest news, benefits, events, and programs related to AARP's mission to empower people to choose how they live as they age. You can also by updating your account at anytime. You will be asked to register or log in. Cancel Offer Details Disclosures