By Marc Zimet, Esq. of Jampol Zimet LLP
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2
nd Circuit recently held that the former director of the New York State Department of Labor could not sue for retaliation after she was fired for opposing how the department handled bias complaints.
Winifred Cooper, the former head of the NY Labor DepartmentaEUR(TM)s Division of Equal Opportunity Development, learned in 2012 of the departmentaEUR(TM)s plan to alter internal complaint policies at the department and other state agencies. Cooper believed the proposed changes conflicted with federal regulations because it subjected the complaint process to political pressure, which in turn would increase the probability that workplace discrimination would not be reported.
In 2013, in response to CooperaEUR(TM)s concerns, the department amended the plan. It fired Cooper one month later, on the premise that it was going a different direction and wanted new leadership. Cooper thereafter sued the department claiming wrongful termination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and state anti-discrimination laws. The U.S. District Court judge dismissed CooperaEUR(TM)s suit, holding that by disagreeing with the departmentaEUR(TM)s complaint handling procedures and opining that they conflicted with federal regulations, Cooper was merely doing her job. The Judge further held that CooperaEUR(TM)s actions in raising Title VII requirements to her department did not constitute a protected activity. Cooper appealed, claiming she did not just inform the department of the Title VII conflicts, but actively opposed the plan changes that she believed to be a violation of Title VII.
The Court of Appeals unanimously dismissed CooperaEUR(TM)s appeal, holding Cooper could not have believed the departmentaEUR(TM)s proposed changes to complaint procedures violated Title VII. While CooperaEUR(TM)s actions to ensure future victims of discrimination did not face obstacles in bringing a complaint, it does not follow that she believed the process was illegal. The decision noted that Title VII unambiguously defines what acts constitute discrimination and unlawful employment practices. Within these Title VII definitions, there is no obligation on employers to maintain procedures for handling internal complaints. Thus, as there is no specific requirement for handling internal complaints, there could be no illegality.
This case demonstrates the complexity of employment law and the gauntlet employers face in ensuring compliance with state and federal laws. Knowledge of legal requirements and strict compliance with laws is essential to avoiding discrimination claims and suits. Even where, as here, an employer operates within the law, it still may face employee claims. Maintaining sound operating policies and procedures can help employers avoid such claims.
If you are an employer facing a retaliation claim from a former employee, or if you would like to review your policies to ensure you are not at risk of a discrimination claim,
Marc Zimet or
Alan Jampol of Jampol Zimet LLP at (213) 689-8500 or at
mzimet@jzlaw.com or
ajampol@jzlaw.com.