From: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Labor Law
(U.S. 7th Cir., Labor & Employment Law) In an action brought
under the Fair Labor Standards Act's retaliation provision,
district court judgment against plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) the
plain language of 29 U.S.C. sec. 215(a)(3) includes internal
complaints as protected activity; and 2) unwritten, purely verbal
complaints are not protected activity under the statute as the
FLSA's use of the phrase "file any complaint" requires a plaintiff
employee to submit some sort of writing.
Respond to this topic on your own blog
Click and press Ctrl+C to copy and paste this discussion on your blog or site
Related Articles
Stephens v. Erickson
(U.S. 7th Cir., Civil Rights, Labor & Employment Law) In an
action for employment discrimination and retaliation, district
court's grant of summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where:
1) plaintiff failed to produce enough evidence to support an
inference that defendant's failure to promote was in retaliation
for his protected activity; 2) the alterations to plaintiff's job
were not materially adverse and insufficient to dissuade a
reasonable employee from filing a discrimination charge; and 3) the
court properly determined that certain comments made by other
employees were either hearsay or irrelevant to the issue of whether
plaintiff was terminated for a retaliatory purpose.
Addis v. Dept. of Labor
(U.S. 7th Cir., Administrative Law, Government Law, Labor &
Employment Law) Petition for review of the Department of Labor's
dismissal of plaintiff's employment retaliation claim is denied
where substantive evidence supported an ALJ's finding that
plaintiff failed to sustain the burden of proving that her
protected activity was a contributing factor in her termination, as
her employer refused plaintiff's attempt to rescind her resignation
because the company was unhappy with her substandard performance
and not in retaliation for filing a safety complaint.
Edwards v. A.H. Cornell & Son, Inc.
(U.S. 3d Cir., Administrative Law, ERISA, Government Law, Labor
& Employment Law) In plaintiff's suit against her employers and
supervisors, claiming that she was terminated in violation of
section 510 of ERISA and state common law after complaining to
management about alleged ERISA violations, district court's grant
of defendants' motion to dismiss is affirmed as unsolicited
internal complaints are not protected activities under the
anti-retaliation provision of section 510 of ERISA.
Edwards v. A.H. Cornell & Son, Inc.
(U.S. 3d Cir., Administrative Law, ERISA, Government Law, Labor
& Employment Law) In plaintiff's suit against her employers and
supervisors, claiming that she was terminated in violation of
section 510 of ERISA and state common law after complaining to
management about alleged ERISA violations, district court's grant
of defendants' motion to dismiss is affirmed as unsolicited
internal complaints are not protected activities under the
anti-retaliation provision of section 510 of ERISA.
Casna v. City of Loves Park
(U.S. 7th Cir., Labor & Employment Law) In an employment
termination brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act,
summary judgment for defendant is reversed where: 1) plaintiff is
entitled to proceed to trial on her due-process claim as she had a
property interest in continuing employment and defendant deprived
her of it without a hearing; and 2) an informal complaint may
constitute protected activity for purposes of retaliation claims
under the ADA; and 3) there is a triable issue as to whether the
employer initiated plaintiff's discharge because she had just
protested her supervisor's possibly discriminatory attitude or
because her work performance was inadequate.
