DE Under 3: Title VII Prohibits Discriminatory Job Transfers Even Without Significant Harm, U.S. Supreme Court Unanimously Ruled
In April 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court held that transferring an employee to a new position with the same rank and pay may constitute an adverse action under Title VII. The recent decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis,...more
The Supreme Court issued several momentous decisions last term that will have a lasting impact on employer practices. The Justices continued to shape the workplace law landscape by ruling on an array of issues involving...more
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act requires employees alleging employment discrimination to show they suffered an adverse employment action as a result of their membership in a protected class....more
In April, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, that to sustain a prima facie case of employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), plaintiffs do...more
In a recent decision, Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified the standard for determining whether an adverse employment action is a sufficient basis for a discrimination claim under Title VII of the...more
On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, a case involving a St. Louis Police Department officer’s claim that she was subject to a discriminatory job...more
If you transfer an employee to a job with no loss in pay or title but the employee thinks it is less desirable, can that employee sue you for discrimination under Title VII? While it depends on the facts, in Muldrow v. St....more
On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued its unanimous decision in Muldrow v. St. Louis, 601 U.S. _____ (2024), which addressed the appropriate standard for evaluating whether a job transfer – even where the...more
An employee challenging a job transfer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act must show the transfer brought about some harm with respect to an identifiable term or condition of employment, but that harm need not be...more
Recently, the United States Supreme Court unanimously determined that under certain circumstances, an intra-company job transfer can form the basis for a discrimination claim under Title VII. This opinion alters the legal...more
The Court's decision in Muldrow v. St. Louis requires plaintiffs to prove "some injury" respecting employment terms or conditions in discrimination cases....more
On April 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court in Muldrow v. St. Louis held that an employee who claimed she was involuntarily transferred to another position because of her sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of...more
One of the decisions avid Supreme Court watchers (yes, aka employment law nerds) have been waiting for was Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri....more
On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court decided Muldrow v. St. Louis, No. 22‑193, holding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discriminatory job transfers that cause “some harm” with respect to the terms,...more
In Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Mo., the U.S. Supreme Court made it easier for employees who are involuntarily transferred to a lateral position to pursue discrimination claims, even when they retain the same pay, benefits...more
On April 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court made it easier for workers to bring employment discrimination suits over job transfers based on sex, race, religion, or national origin. Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued an opinion on Wednesday, April 17, 2024, that will make it easier for employees to pursue discrimination claims against their employers based on job transfers or other...more
Just a little harm will do. On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Title VII does not require a plaintiff to show that a discriminatory transfer to another position caused her to suffer “significant” or...more
An employer’s decision to transfer an employee to a lateral job – with no change in pay or benefits – may violate federal civil rights law in some situations if it’s based on discriminatory reasons. According to a SCOTUS...more
The Supreme Court may soon clarify whether an employer’s decision to transfer an employee to a lateral job – with no change in pay or benefits – violates federal civil rights law if it’s done for discriminatory reasons....more
When is a job transfer not just a transfer? The Supreme Court will soon decide whether lateral job transfers, with no change in pay or benefits, violates federal civil rights law if done for discriminatory reasons. Read on...more
The Supreme Court’s blockbuster decisions last term dominated the headlines – and many rulings will have a lasting impact on employer practices. The Justices continued to shape the workplace law landscape by ruling on an...more