UPDATED: Supreme Court Embraces Broader Definition of Actionable Retaliation

The Supreme Court has just issued its ruling in Burlington Northern v. White, unanimously holding that a worker complaining of retaliation on the job for having complained about bias may sue even if that individual has not suffered an ultimate adverse action such as firing or denial of promotion. Other actions, such as reassignment to a less attractive job or a temporary suspension without pay can constitute retaliation.

We will have more on this opinion soon. In the meantime for some background, you can see our previous posts on this case here, here, and here.


Boil the opinion down to one sentence:

"We also conclude that the [anti-retaliation] provision covers those (and only those) employer actions that would have been materially adverse to a reasonable employee or job applicant."

Here is a link to the opinion.sexual harassmentCategories: CourtOpinions