How A Recent Supreme Court Ruling Impacts You At Work
This past term, the U.S. Supreme Court handed employees who are unhappy with a work transfer or potentially other changes in their role at work a victory in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, 601 U.S. —-, at *2 (2024). Both the St. Louis Missouri District Court and the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled in favor of the employer, the St. Louis Police Department. Justice Elena Kagan, writing for a unanimous Court, reversed and held that an employer’s transferring an employee to a different position may constitute an act of discrimination even when the employee’s title and salary remain the same if there is “some “disadvantageous change in an employment term or condition.” The Court also ruled that the employee need not prove under Title VII (the federal anti-discrimination statute) that the harm or disadvantage suffered from the transfer was “significant;” the Court of Appeals having ruled in the employer’s favor that Muldrow needed to show that the transfer caused her a “materially significant disadvantage.”
Employment Law Case: Background and Context
The plaintiff Sergeant Jatonya Clayborn Muldrow worked as a plainclothes officer in the St. Louis Police Department for several years. Muldrow butted heads with a new incoming male Intelligence Division commander in 2017 and that commander put in a transfer request to transfer Muldrow out of the division so he could replace her with a male police officer. Muldrow opposed the transfer, but the Department approved the commander’s transfer request and reassigned Muldrow to a uniformed job elsewhere in the Department.
Though Muldrow opposed the transfer, her rank (title) and salary remained exactly the same in the new position. However, her responsibilities, the job perks, and schedule were unfavorably changed. As a result of the transfer, she no longer worked with high-ranking officers on priority matters in the Division. Rather, she was required to supervise day-to-day activities of patrol officers. Additionally, she lost access to an unmarked take-home vehicle and was given a less regular schedule that included weekend shifts.
The Importance of Retaining Qualified Legal Counsel for Employment Law Cases
Muldrow retained counsel and brought a Title VII lawsuit to challenging the transfer and arguing that her employer had “discriminate[d] against” her based on sex “with respect to” the “terms [or] conditions” of her employment (42 U. S. C. §2000e–2(a)(1)) because of the changes in the terms and conditions of employment. The lower courts cautioned about opening “the floodgates of litigation” if they were to rule in the employee’s favor and dismissed her lawsuit.
2024 Supreme Court Case: Significant Victory for Employees
As indicated, in a significant victory for employees, the Supreme Court reversed and ruled in the employee’s favor, holding that the changes in her employment resulting from the transfer, though her salary and title did not change, were enough to show “some harm” for purposes of Title VII.
Court Opinion: Implications for Discrimination at Work
Writing for the unanimous Court, Justice Kagan held that an employment facing a job transfer that s/he believes to be discriminatory does not have to show that the harm caused by the transfer was “significant” or otherwise exceeded some heightened bar. “Discriminate against means treat worse, here based on sex.” citing See, e.g., Bostock, 590 U. S., at 657. The Court noted that the difference in standards can make a “real difference for complaining transferees” and reversed, refusing to require the higher standard of proof to show a transfer was discriminatory.
While employers and attorneys representing those employers are disappointed in the decision, the reasoning of the Court is sound and when the odds are stacked against employees in disputes with their employers under current federal law, the decision is welcome and significant.
How This Case Impacts You if You Have Faced Discrimination at Work
If you are unhappy with a recent transfer, a change in your responsibilities, the benefits or perks of your job, schedule or any other aspect, and you believe that the transfer or change was discriminatory in some sense, you are well advised to discuss the matter with an attorney as soon as possible. Remember, there are significant statutes of limitations to bring Title VII claims. Moreover, there are a host of advantages by moving quickly to secure competent counsel and addressing the matter expeditiously.
Get A Free Case Consultation Today
Call award-winning attorneys at Giordano Law Offices Personal Injury & Employment Lawyers for a free case consultation about your employment case or case of discrimination or marginalization at work today: (646) 217-0749 – you can call or text this number.