The Supreme Court ruled in favor of employers in two separate cases yesterday.
The first case, which we will discuss in today’s blog post, centered on the issue of the definition of the word “supervisor”. The significance of the term (which the lower courts were divided over) hinges on the liability attributed to an employee of supervisory status as opposed to a regular employee.
The plaintiff, Maetta Vance, a catering worker at Indiana’s Ball State University, sued the school after claiming that she was subjected to racial harassment on the part of a woman she described as her supervisor. However, the university claimed that the woman did not in fact hold the title of supervisor.
Although the plaintiff argued that an employee who oversaw work was a supervisor, the 5-4 decision, written by Justice Alito, defined the term supervisor as an employee with the ability to hire, promote, transfer, discipline, or terminate an employee. The decision upheld the 7th Circuit Court’s decision in favor of Ball State University.
Tomorrow we will discuss the other discrimination case decided yesterday as well as the ramifications of these decisions.
The Patterson Law Firm has dealt with many discrimination cases. One notable case involved gender discrimination against a female supervisor in the Chicago Park District. We were able to win a contested trial that included a jury comprised of eleven males and one female.
To learn more about the services we offer visit pattersonlawfirm.com or call (312) 223-1699 to speak with one of our experienced attorneys.