Class 5 Legal Environment of Work: Scope of Protection Against Discrimination

0.0(0)
Studied by 0 people
call kaiCall Kai
learnLearn
examPractice Test
spaced repetitionSpaced Repetition
heart puzzleMatch
flashcardsFlashcards
GameKnowt Play
Card Sorting

1/21

flashcard set

Earn XP

Description and Tags

Vocabulary flashcards covering key employment discrimination concepts, protected classes, disparate treatment, retaliation, whistleblower protections, and major Supreme Court precedents.

22 Terms

1
New cards

Protected Classes

Identified groups legally safeguarded from employment discrimination under Title VII and related civil rights laws, including race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age (40 or older), disability, pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity, and genetic information.

2
New cards

Age Threshold (ADEA / ELCRA)

The legal age boundary defining the protected class for age discrimination, covering individuals who are 40 years of age or older.

3
New cards

Unprotected Groups

Groups that do not hold statutory protection against employment discrimination under federal civil rights laws, including individuals categorized by low income/social class, first generation status, physical unattractiveness, homelessness, and anti-vaccination views.

4
New cards

Categories Protected in Select Jurisdictions

Characteristics that are protected under local or state statutes in certain places but lack comprehensive federal protection, specifically including weight (overweight), veteran status, and political affiliation.

5
New cards

Bostock v. Clayton County (2020)

A landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that Title VII's prohibition of discrimination because of sex encompasses sexual orientation and gender identity / transgender status, reasoning that an employer cannot discriminate on these grounds without impermissibly discriminating because of sex.

6
New cards

"But-For" Causation (Bostock)

The legal causation standard affirmed in Bostock v. Clayton County establishing that discrimination is unlawful if the employee would not have suffered the adverse employment action but for their sex.

7
New cards

Groff v. DeJoy (2023)

A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ruling addressing Title VII religious accommodations, holding that an employer asserting an undue hardship defense must demonstrate that granting the accommodation would cause a substantial burden in the overall context of the employer's business.

8
New cards

Undue Hardship (Religious Accommodation)

The legal defense standard under Title VII requiring an employer to show that accommodating an employee's religious practice would inflict a substantial burden in the overall context of their business, evaluated as a highly fact-specific issue.

9
New cards

De Minimis Cost Standard

The prior interpretation of the undue hardship defense in religious accommodation cases—suggesting an employer needed only to show more than a minimal or trivial cost—which was overturned and declared incorrect in Groff v. DeJoy.

10
New cards

Disparate Treatment

Intentional discrimination directed at an employee or applicant on the basis of a protected class, which can be demonstrated through direct evidence or by indirect inference.

11
New cards

Direct Evidence of Intent

Unambiguous evidence linking adverse treatment directly to a protected characteristic, exemplified by explicit statements about a class by an agent of the employer or position denials based directly on protected class status.

12
New cards

Indirect Inference Framework

A procedural framework for establishing disparate treatment where an applicant shows a relationship between an adverse employment action and their class, the employer presents a legitimate reason, and the applicant proves intentional discrimination or pretext.

13
New cards

Retaliation

Unlawful adverse action taken by an employer against a current employee or applicant for exercising statutory rights, making a discrimination complaint, or supporting and participating in discrimination proceedings.

14
New cards

Timing of Disparate Treatment (Retaliation)

The temporal proximity between an employee's protected complaint and the employer's adverse action; an important indicator of retaliation, though insufficient on its own if the employer provides another valid, uncontradicted reason.

15
New cards

Cryton v. PharMEDium (2016)

A retaliation case in which summary judgment was denied after two African American chemists were discharged less than 3 months following their HR race discrimination complaint, and the employer's stated reasons for the terminations were contradicted.

16
New cards

Whistleblower

An employee who reports or brings forward claims of employer violations of law, mismanagement, abuse of authority, or dangers to public safety.

17
New cards

Whistleblower Protection Act

A statute protecting employees from adverse employment actions when reporting violations, gross mismanagement, abuse of authority, or specific dangers to public safety.

18
New cards

Reasonable Good Faith Belief

The subjective and objective belief standard an employee must hold regarding their claim in order to be protected against retaliation or whistleblower discharge, meaning they do not need to successfully prove the underlying violation to receive protection.

19
New cards

Causation (Whistleblower/Retaliation)

The necessary factual nexus proving an adverse employment action was caused by the protected act, such as being discharged shortly after complaining about unpaid overtime.

20
New cards

Job Duty Limitation

A legal restriction stating that an employee cannot invoke whistleblower protection if the reported misconduct, violation, or compliance issue forms part of the employee's regular assigned job duties.

21
New cards

Disparate Impact

A category of discrimination occurring when facially neutral employment practices or policies disproportionately disadvantage members of a protected class, distinguished from intentional disparate treatment.

22
New cards

ELCRA (Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act)

Michigan state legislation prohibiting employment discrimination on the basis of protected characteristics such as race and age, containing four elements applied in state employment disputes like Wright v. MDOC.