Crawford v. Metro is an important 6th Circuit case that the US Supreme Court has agreed to hear.
At issue is a Federal anti-discrimination law called Title VII. This law expressly protects employees from retaliation in two ways. Employees who participate in an investigation, and those who oppose discriminatory practices are supposed to be shielded from retaliation. But it’s a little more complicated, because those who “participate” actually get more protection than those who “oppose.”
In the instant case, Ms Crawford was a 30-year employee of the defendant, a government agency. She was called in for an interview about allegations of sexual harassment that had been made against a manager. At that interview, Ms Crawford accused the manager of sexual harassment, both of herself and of others. She was later fired.
The Sixth Circuit held that Ms Crawford did not “oppose” discriminatory practices because she did not instigate the investigation by complaining. The court held that Ms Crawford’s participation in the investigation wasn’t protected by the “participation” clause because charges had not yet been filed. This seems to be an unjust result, one that runs against the policies of Title VII.
Post a Comment