The Harris verdict illustrates the elevated risk that can exist when employee discipline is undertaken around the same time the employee engages in protected activity.
In clearing the employee’s claims for trial, the court explained that a reasonable jury could conclude that the company’s explanation for her termination didn’t hold up: Sam’s Club said it fired the employee because of a different sexual harassment complaint lodged against her, but the plaintiff said she was never told about the complaint and said others were not subject to the same level of discipline. Therefore, the court said, a jury should decide whether her termination was retaliatory.
