Category Archives: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Hostile work environment, Sex Discrimination, Sexual harassment, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, WV Human Rights Act

The Evolving Standard for Hostile Work Environment Claims

Leave a comment

When employees say their workplace is “toxic” or “hostile,” they’re often using the term loosely—maybe it’s office drama, an annoying boss, or just a generally tense atmosphere. But in employment law, a hostile work environment has a very specific legal meaning. And as courts have refined the standard over the years, the line between what’s actionable and what’s just unpleasant has gotten sharper (but not necessarily clearer).

For both employers and employees in West Virginia, it’s important to understand what actually qualifies as a hostile work environment under the law, how these claims are proven, and what the potential pitfalls are in litigation. Spoiler alert: just being a jerk isn’t necessarily illegal.

What Is a Hostile Work Environment?

Under both federal law and West Virginia law, a hostile work environment occurs when an employee is subjected to discriminatory harassment that is severe or pervasive enough to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive working environment.

Continue reading The Evolving Standard for Hostile Work Environment Claims →
Contract Issues, Employee handbook, Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), Harless wrongful discharge, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Whitle blower claims (including Harless), Worker's compensation retaliation, WV Human Rights Act, WV Human Rights Commission

“At-Will” Employment in West Virginia: What It Really Means (and What It Doesn’t)

Leave a comment

Most folks in West Virginia—employers and employees alike—have heard the phrase “at-will employment.” It gets tossed around a lot, especially when someone’s been fired and is trying to figure out if it was legal. But like a lot of legal phrases, “at-will” means more (and sometimes less) than people assume.

In this article, we’re going to take a clear-eyed look at what at-will employment actually means under West Virginia law, the key exceptions to it, and how courts treat wrongful discharge claims. Whether you’re running a business or advising a worker, understanding these rules is crucial to avoiding (or pursuing) a lawsuit.

The Basic Rule: At-Will Employment Means Either Side Can Walk

The general rule in West Virginia—and most other states—is that employment is presumed to be at-will. That means an employer can terminate an employee for any reason, no reason, or even a bad reason, just not an illegal one. Similarly, employees can quit at any time without notice or explanation.

This doctrine has been around forever. It’s grounded in common law principles and reinforced by state court decisions. But, as always, the devil is in the details.

Continue reading “At-Will” Employment in West Virginia: What It Really Means (and What It Doesn’t) →
Age Discrimination, Americans with Disabilities Act, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, WV Human Rights Act, WV Human Rights Commission

The Roles of the EEOC and the West Virginia Human Rights Commission in Workplace Discrimination Claims

Leave a comment

Workplace discrimination is a serious issue, and employees who believe they’ve been treated unfairly often turn to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) or the West Virginia Human Rights Commission (“HRC”) for help. But what exactly do the EEOC and HRC do, and how does the complaint process work? Whether you’re an employer trying to stay compliant or an employee considering filing a claim, it is important to understand the EEOC’s and HRC’s roles.

What Is the EEOC?

The EEOC is the federal agency responsible for enforcing anti-discrimination laws in the workplace. It investigates complaints of discrimination based on race, sex, age, disability, national origin, religion, and other protected characteristics under laws like:

  • Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2)
  • The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) (29 U.S.C. § 623)
  • The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (42 U.S.C. § 12112)

The agency also enforces laws prohibiting retaliation, meaning an employer can’t punish an employee for filing a complaint or participating in an investigation.

Continue reading The Roles of the EEOC and the West Virginia Human Rights Commission in Workplace Discrimination Claims →
Pregnancy discrimination, Sex Discrimination, Sexual harassment, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, WV Human Rights Act

Workplace Harassment: What Employers and Employees Need to Know

Leave a comment

Workplace harassment is a serious issue that can lead to legal trouble for employers and create a toxic work environment for employees. While most people think of harassment in terms of sexual misconduct, the law covers a much broader range of behaviors. Understanding what constitutes workplace harassment and how to handle it is crucial for both employers and employees.

What Is Workplace Harassment?

Harassment is defined as unwelcome conduct based on race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, gender identity, and sexual orientation), national origin, age (40 or older), disability, or genetic information (42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(a)). It becomes illegal when:

  • Enduring the offensive conduct becomes a condition of continued employment, or
  • The conduct is severe or pervasive enough to create a hostile work environment (Meritor Sav. Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986)).

Harassment isn’t just about inappropriate jokes or unwanted advances—it can include threats, intimidation, offensive images, or even workplace policies that disproportionately affect certain groups.

Continue reading Workplace Harassment: What Employers and Employees Need to Know →
Harless wrongful discharge, Retaliation claims, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Whitle blower claims (including Harless), WV Human Rights Act

Wrongful Termination: What It Is and What It Isn’t

Leave a comment

Losing a job is tough, but not every termination is illegal. The term “wrongful termination” gets thrown around a lot, but in legal terms, it has a specific meaning. Both employers and employees need to understand what actually qualifies as wrongful termination under federal and West Virginia law.

What Is Wrongful Termination?

Wrongful termination happens when an employer fires an employee in violation of a law, contract, or public policy. This can include:

  • Discrimination: Firing someone based on race, gender, age, disability, or other protected characteristics violates federal and state anti-discrimination laws (42 U.S.C. §2000e-2; W. Va. Code §16B-17-9).
  • Retaliation: Employers can’t fire an employee for reporting discrimination, workplace safety violations, or engaging in other protected activities (42 U.S.C. 2000e-3(a); W. Va. Code §16B-17-9(7)).
  • Breach of contract: If an employee has a written contract or even an implied contract promising job security, a termination outside the agreed terms may be wrongful (Cook v. Heck’s Inc., 342 S.E.2d 453 (W. Va. 1986)).
  • Public policy violations: Employers can’t fire employees for reasons that violate public policy, such as refusing to engage in illegal activities (Harless v. First Nat’l Bank, 246 S.E.2d 270 (W. Va. 1978)).
Continue reading Wrongful Termination: What It Is and What It Isn’t →
Hostile work environment, Settlements, Sexual harassment, Taxes, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Congress against sexual harassment, part 1: Taxes

Leave a comment

This article is the first of 3 parts to cover 3 Acts of Congress directed at expanding the rights of sexual harassment and abuse victims.

The series of 3 federal laws on sexual harassment claims

  • Congress first in 2017, with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“TCJA”), limited employer tax deductions for settlements of sexual harassment and abuse cases where the settlement agreement included a nondisclosure agreement. That’s what this article is about.
  • Congress next in March 2022 passed the  Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Harassment Act of 2021 which invalidates arbitration agreements over sexual harassment and abuse claims, where the agreement is signed before a dispute arose. That’s my second article in this series.
  • Congress then in December 2022 passed the Speak Out Act which invalidated nondisclosure and non-disparagement agreements in sexual harassment and abuse claims where the agreements were procured before a dispute arose. That’s my third article in this series.
Continue reading Congress against sexual harassment, part 1: Taxes →
Age Discrimination, Americans with Disabilities Act, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Pregnancy discrimination, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

EEOC has updated its poster that employers must display

Leave a comment

The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) has updated its poster that employers are required to display in their workplaces. Here is the EEOC’s web site on its poster. Here is an internet (HTML) copy of the poster. Here is the PDF of the printable poster for wall display. The name of the poster is “Know Your Rights: Workplace Discrimination is Illegal”.

The poster does a good job of educating employees and employers on essential aspects of the federal anti-discrimination laws. It covers what employees are protected, what employers are covered, the protected characteristics about which the laws prohibit discrimination, the decisions and conduct of the employers that are prohibited, and how an employee can file a charge with the EEOC. In light of newer technology, the poster has a QR code so an employee can user a phone to jump straight to the EEOC’s web site for filing a charge.

Continue reading EEOC has updated its poster that employers must display →
Age Discrimination, Constructive discharge, Hostile work environment, Result for Employee, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Fifth Circuit applies hostile work environment to age claims

1 Comment

Courts have sometimes questioned whether hostile work environment claims apply to all “flavors” of discrimination. Hostile work environment claims most frequently arise in claims of sex discrimination  and race discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but age discrimination claims under federal law arise under a different statute, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967.

The Fifth Circuit directly held recently that hostile work environment claims are encompassed by age discrimination claims under the ADEA in Dediol v. Best Chevrolet, Inc., — F.3d — (5th Cir. September 12, 2011).

Continue reading Fifth Circuit applies hostile work environment to age claims →
Evidence issues, Medical Industry Litigation, Result for Employee, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, US Supreme Court, USERRA

US Supreme Court Rules for Employee on "Cat’s Paw" Theory

Leave a comment

The United States Supreme Court recently unanimously issued a major victory for employees under “USERRA“, the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994, 38 U.S.C. § 4301 et seq., on the “cat’s paw” theory in employment discrimination claims. The decision was in Staub v. Proctor Hospital, — U.S. — (March 1, 2011) (opinion at Google Scholar). Justice Scalia wrote the opinion for the unanimous court. Justice Alito wrote an opinion concurring in the judgment, which Justice Thomas joined. Justice Kagan did not participate in the decision.

What is the “Cat’s Paw” Scenario?

Drew's kitty-cat, HannaSo, what the heck is the “cat’s paw” theory? Does it explain why my cat, pictured at the left, is staring so intently at you?

First, to define “cat’s paw” in a non-legal context, the Webster’s Online dictionary defines a “cat’s paw” as: “A person used by another to gain an end.” The term arises out of a fable in which a a shrewd monkey tricks a cat into pulling roasting chestnuts out of a fire—the cat gets its paw burned, and the monkey gets the chestnuts and scampers away unhurt.

Continue reading US Supreme Court Rules for Employee on "Cat’s Paw" Theory →
Hostile work environment, Prompt remedial action, Result for Employee, Sex Discrimination, Sexual harassment, Summary Judgment, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Single act may create hostile work environment, according to Seventh Circuit in Berry v. Chicago Transit Authority

Leave a comment

A few days ago, I posted my article on PAR Electrical Contractors, Inc. v. Bevelle , in which the West Virginia Supreme Court ruled that a single episode involving multiple uses of the N-word could create a racially hostile work environment.

The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit just released an opinion in Berry v. Chicago Transit Authority, 618 F.3d 688 (7th Cir. 2010), which raises the similar issue: Can a single instance of sexual harassment create a hostile work environment? And the answer was yes, depending on the circumstances.

Ms. Berry is Sexually Harassed in a Single Incident

Cynthia Berry was an employee at the Chicago Transit Authority. She was on her break and sat at a picnic style table with three male co-workers. A fourth male co-worker, Philip Carmichael, had followed her to the picnic area and ordered Ms. Berry to get up from the table. Offended by Mr. Carmichael’s “commanding tone”, Ms. Berry remained seated. Mr. Carmichael then sat down and “straddled the bench” so he was facing one of the male co-workers at the picnic table, and so that Mr. Carmichael’s back was close to Ms. Berry. The other three male co-workers got up from where they were seated at the picnic table and moved to the other end of the table. Then:

Berry says Carmichael remained where he was seated and began rubbing his back against her shoulder. She jumped up, told him not to rub himself against her, and sat down next to Hardy at the other end of the table. At this point,
Berry says, Marshall began telling her to get up from the table again. Not wanting Marshall to think he could order her around, she remained seated, but began rubbing her temples to compose herself. According to Berry, she next felt Carmichael grabbing her breasts and lifting her up from the bench. Holding her in the air, he rubbed her buttocks against the front of his body—from his chest to his penis—three times before bringing her to the ground with force. Berry landed off-balance, with only one leg on the ground, and says Carmichael then pushed her into a fence. Upset and wanting to avoid any men, she lay down in a bus for the rest of her shift.

Continue reading Single act may create hostile work environment, according to Seventh Circuit in Berry v. Chicago Transit Authority →