Court Grants Harassment Complaints Broad Protection

July 12, 2009 by Beeson Tayer & Bodine

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that Title VII provides protection for employees who speak out about harassment in response to the employer’s internal investigation. Crawford v. Metro. Gov’t of Nashville & Davidson County (2009).

The case arose after Crawford’s employer asked her whether she had witnessed inappropriate behavior by the employee relations director. She responded that she had, and went on to describe the offending conduct. Crawford was later fired. Crawford brought a lawsuit against the employer, alleging discrimination under Title VII, which prohibits an employer from discriminating against an employee because: “(1) he has opposed any [unlawful discrimination] practice …, or (2) because he has made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under [Title VII].” Both the trial and appellate courts ruled against Crawford, stating that because Crawford did not initiate any complaint, but was merely responding to questioning by the employer, she was not actively “opposing” the harassing conduct.

The Supreme Court reversed. In doing so, the Court rejected the employer’s assertions that the protections of Title VII only extended to employees who actively, consistently oppose the harassing activities. Instead, the Court stated:

“There is … no reason to doubt that a person can ‘oppose’ by responding to someone else’s question just as surely as by provoking the discussion, and nothing in the statute requires a freakish rule protecting an employee who reports discrimination on her own initiative but not one who reports the same discrimination in the same words when her boss asks a question.”

The material on this website is provided by Beeson, Tayer & Bodine for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult with their own legal counsel before acting on any of the information presented. Some of the articles are updated periodically, and are marked with the date of the last update. Again, readers should consult with their own legal counsel for the most current information and to obtain professional advice before acting on any of the information presented.