United States Supreme Court Eases Path for Job Transfer Discrimination Lawsuits

In a recent ruling, the US Supreme Court made it easier for employees to bring lawsuits against their employers alleging discrimination in job reassignments. In Muldrow v. St. Louis, the Supreme Court held that while an employee must show that they suffered “harm” from a job transfer, they do not need to show that the harm was “material” or “significant”.

The plaintiff, a St. Louis police sergeant, alleged that she was transferred from her post as a plainclothes officer in the intelligence section to another post because she was a woman. The plaintiff’s pay and rank remained the same, but she lost certain privileges and her schedule changed significantly, including having to work on nights and weekends. The lower courts sided with the police department, ruling that her harm was not “material” enough to proceed with her suit.

The Supreme Court reversed this ruling. While the Eighth Circuit had previously required that plaintiffs show a “material” harm to prove a claim of employment discrimination, the Supreme Court held that a lower standard should be used. Instead, a plaintiff only needs to show that they suffered some harm, even if it does not rise to the level of a loss of pay.

Employers who are considering transferring employees to positions where they will suffer some loss will need to plan carefully to avoid allegations of discrimination. The attorneys at SJJ Law are ready to provide any assistance you may need.