In Win For Sears, Supreme Court Won't Hear Retaliation Case
From Crain's Chicago Business
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to consider whether Sears Holdings Corp. improperly fired a former supervisor who objected to how the retailer handled a sexual harassment probe she helped conduct.
Without comment, the court declined to take up an appeal by Janet Brush, who had worked on and off for Sears for 15 years, most recently as a "loss prevention district coach" for the Hoffman Estates-based retailer's Kmart unit.
Brush claimed she was let go in November 2007 after Sears rejected her urging that Florida police be told that a male store supervisor might have on three occasions raped a female assistant. She claimed that the firing violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin.
But the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Miami last March disagreed. It said this was because management workers who in the course of their jobs oppose their employers' actions do not engage in "protected activity" under Title VII.
Read more in our daily News Update...
From Crain's Chicago Business
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to consider whether Sears Holdings Corp. improperly fired a former supervisor who objected to how the retailer handled a sexual harassment probe she helped conduct.
Without comment, the court declined to take up an appeal by Janet Brush, who had worked on and off for Sears for 15 years, most recently as a "loss prevention district coach" for the Hoffman Estates-based retailer's Kmart unit.
Brush claimed she was let go in November 2007 after Sears rejected her urging that Florida police be told that a male store supervisor might have on three occasions raped a female assistant. She claimed that the firing violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin.
But the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Miami last March disagreed. It said this was because management workers who in the course of their jobs oppose their employers' actions do not engage in "protected activity" under Title VII.
Read more in our daily News Update...