On November 12, 2009, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued an opinion reinforcing the notion that “the Supreme Court favors an increasingly broad interpretation of statutes containing anti-retaliation provisions.” In the case, Mansifield v. Billington, a plaintiff filed a motion for relief upon reconsideration of a previously dismissed retaliation claim brought under the Equal Pay Act.
The plaintiff delivered a letter to her employer alleging that she was being paid less than her male counterparts. About two weeks later, she was told her position was being eliminated. She filed a complaint alleging gender discrimination under Title VII and retaliation under the EPA. Her retaliation claim was dismissed in June 2006 and her Title VII claim in September 2008. In October 2009, she filed her motion on the basis that evolving federal case law and recent Supreme Court decisions support her position. The Court granted the motion, citing the “changing trend in the interpretation of federal laws prohibiting retaliation in the work place.” The Court also acknowledged that retaliation is another form of intentional discrimination.
For information on The Employment Law Group® law firm’s Equal Pay Act Practice, click here.
This entry was posted
on Monday, November 30th, 2009 at 11:01 am and is filed under Equal Pay Act, Federal Discrimination Legislation, Retaliation, Title VII, Title VII Discrimination.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.
Ada federal lawyers washington dc, Age discrimination Maryland lawyer, Age discrimination attorney, DC Discrimination, DC Employment Discrimination, Discrimination in the workplace, Discrimination law, Discrimination lawyer, Employment Discrimination, Employment law DC, Employment law, Employment lawyer, Hiring discrimination, Top employment lawyer, age discrimination, age discrimination act, age discrimination attorney, age discrimination cases, age discrimination claim, age discrimination counsel, discrimination law offices, hostile work environment, age discrimination employment act, Quid pro quo harassment, DC Discrimination attorney, Civil Right lawyer in Washington dc, Disability attorney, Disability discrimination, Disability discrimination attorney, Disability discrimination lawyer, Disability employment discrimination, Disability employment law, Discrimination law offices, Employment law, Employment law dc, Hiring discrimination, Physical disability discrimination, Top employment lawyer, Workplace disability discrimination, Workplace discrimination, disability attorney, disability discrimination act, disability discrimination law, social security disability attorney, social security disability lawyer, gender discrimination, sex discrimination, employee rights on sexual harassment Virginia, employment harassment, employment lawyer, harassment in workplace, harassment lawyer in Washington dc, harassment lawyers, hostile environment sexual harassment, hostile work environment, Maryland sexual harassment, sexual harassment at workplace, sexual harassment attorney, sexual harassment in the work place, sexual harassment law, sexual harassment lawyer, sexual harassment policies, sexual harassment policy, termination, workplace sexual harassment, wrongful terminationlawyers, harassment attorney, LGBT Discrimination Attorneys, Employment discrimination against gays, Employment discrimination against Lesbians, Gay Issues in Workplace, Gender based discrimination, Harassment discrimination, LGBT Workplace Discrimination, Sexual Orientation Discrimination, Transgender discrimination, gay discrimination, gay rights attorneys, gay rights lawyers
lifestyle discrimination