Kilies and Watkins: The Cat’s Paw theory: Navigating employer liability
Under the Cat’s Paw Theory, employers may be liable if it is eventually uncovered that there was a discriminatory basis underlying the adverse employment decision.
Under the Cat’s Paw Theory, employers may be liable if it is eventually uncovered that there was a discriminatory basis underlying the adverse employment decision.
What should employers do with any noncompete provisions they currently have in their employment contracts?
Employers likely remember Bostock v. Clayton County, the landmark decision where the Supreme Court of the United States extended Title VII’s “because of sex” protections to sexual orientation and transgender status. In that case, the Supreme Court made clear that it is unlawful under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act for employers to terminate employees for being gay or transgender but left open some questions.
The Uniform Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act provides various protections to service members; most notably, the act requires employers to reemploy employees returning from military service. It is important to understand the basic requirements of the act, as failure to comply with them could expose an employer to claims for lost wages, lost benefits and attorney fees.