Most statutes governing the employment relationship contain a non-retaliation provision prohibiting punishing an employee for engaging in conduct protected under the statute. Retaliation claims are now the most common charge the EEOC receives. This article provides a brief overview of the issues surrounding retaliation claims, with a focus on Title VII (and a brief discussion of New York City law); but the general analysis applies to claims under most statutes.
Retaliation means “to repay (as an injury) in kind; to return like for like; especially: to get revenge.” http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/retaliation. “[R]etaliation is a form of discrimination.” Vega v. Hempstead Union Free School Dist., 801 F.3d 72, 82 (2d Cir. 2015). To state a claim for retaliation under Title VII a plaintiff must show (1) participation in a protected activity, (2) defendant’s knowledge of the activity, (3) adverse employment action, and (4) causal connection between the protected activity and the adverse action. Kwan v. The Andalex Group, 737 F.3d 834, 844 (2d Cir. 2013).
Protected Activity
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
