The Supreme Court on Wednesday made it easier for workers who are transferred from one job to another against their will to pursue job discrimination claims under federal civil rights law, even when they are not demoted or docked pay.

Workers only have to show that the transfer resulted in some, but not necessarily significant, harm to prove their claims, Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the court.

The justices unanimously revived a sex discrimination lawsuit filed by a St. Louis police sergeant after she was forcibly transferred, but retained her rank and pay.

Sgt. Jaytonya Muldrow had worked for nine years in a plainclothes position in the department’s intelligence division before a new commander reassigned her to a uniformed position in which she supervised patrol officers. The new commander wanted a male officer in the intelligence job and sometimes called Muldrow “Mrs.” instead of “sergeant,” Kagan wrote.

Muldrow sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion and national origin. Lower courts had dismissed Muldrow’s claim, concluding that she had not suffered a significant job disadvantage.

  • Pheonixdown@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    7 months ago

    It certainly doesn’t hurt, but she won based on it being an illegal form of discrimination causing some form of harm, a non-discriminatory policy might be viewed differently.

    • Zorsith
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      I mean, it does unnecessarily impact specific subsets of people (people who are unable to drive due to disabilities, people that can’t relocate to certain areas due to severe allergies, medical conditions that have very limited specialists available to treat, etc)

      • Pheonixdown@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        ADA covers a bit of that already, and can already be effectively welded against return to office policies, but they are individual specific exceptions to a global policy. This was targeted illegal discrimination.