Skip to main content

Rumor Has It: U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Consider Whether Spreading a False Rumor Can Create a Hostile Work Environment


At the start of the month, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from a Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Parker v. Reema Consulting Services, Inc., a February 2019 case that found that the spreading of a false rumor that a female employee slept her way to a promotion could give rise to a hostile work environment claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

In the case, Evangeline Parker ("Parker") claimed that she was discriminated against on the grounds that her employer allowed a hostile work environment to exist when it allowed a false rumor to spread that Parker got a promotion because she slept with a supervisor.  The facts in the record established that the employer knew of the rumor (originated by some co-workers of Parker), with one of the managers even excluding from a meeting in which the rumor was discussed.  As well, the manager went on to tell Parker that she could no longer be recommended for promotions or higher level tasks because of the rumor.  After getting two warnings for apparent employment related conduct,

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals found that Parker had stated a viable Title VII claim against her former employer.  Agreeing with precedent from the Third and Sixth Circuits, the Fourth Circuit held that rumors that relate to sexual conduct are based on sex (and therefore actionable under Title VII.)  However, this opinion was noteworthy in so much that it further established a split among the circuits with the Second, Seventh, and Tenth Circuits having gone the opposite direction, finding that these rumors are based on conduct, rather than sex (and therefore not actionable under Title VII.)

The appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court subsequently followed the Fourth Circuit's decision.  I am somewhat surprised by the Supreme Court declining to take the case on appeal, as the Court's ruling on the matter would have resolved a growing split among Circuits.  While we could speculate that the Court is not interested in clarifying the matter at this time, does not think this case has the "proper" facts to resolve the split, etc., etc., for the time being, the Fourth Circuit's decision stands.


For additional information:  https://www.natlawreview.com/article/supreme-court-will-not-disturb-ruling-false-rumor-about-sleeping-your-way-to?amp

For additional information from the U.S. Supreme Court:  https://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/18-1442.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

Breaking: Labor Secretary Rumored to Be Leaving Administration

A few hours ago, word leaked out that Labor Secretary Marty Walsh (“Walsh”) is in the midst of negotiations to head up the NHL Players Union and leave his position at the Labor Department. Walsh, who has served as the sole Labor Secretary under President Biden, has taken part in a labor renaissance of sorts as support for organized labor has increased during his term as Labor Secretary (although the number of workers that have joined a union over the past two years has not grown as mush as some expected.)  He has also overseen the ongoing negotiations with rail workers over a new contract, although that matter is still on shaky ground and playing out as we speak. As for who might step into the vacant Labor Secretary role, there are already rumblings that President Biden should nominate Deputy Labor Secretary Julie Su (a strong labor advocate) or even a progressive like Senator Bernie Sanders.  Until Walsh officially gives his notice, however, I would expect some/many potential...
Post a Comment
Read more

Distance in a Non-Compete Agreement Measured "As the Crow Flies"

Ginn v. Stonecreek Dental Care - Court of Appeals, Twelfth Appellate District of Ohio Facts :  Dr. R. Douglas Martin ("Martin") sold his dental practice to an employee who worked there, Dr. David Ginn ("Ginn").  In doing so, Martin and Ginn signed a contract for the sale which contained a non-compete provision that prohibited Martin from engaging in business "within 30 miles" of the practice for five years starting from October 2010.  While Martin initially stayed on and worked with Ginn for a period, the relationship subsequently deteriorated between the two and Martin went to work for another dental office.  The new dental office was less than 30 miles away when measuring the distance in a straight line.  However, when driving between the offices, the distance was more than 30 miles. Ginn filed a claim against Martin on the grounds that Martin breached the non-compete.   At the trial court level, the court found that "within 30 miles"...
Post a Comment
Read more