News & Information

 

FEATURED PRODUCT

U.S. Master™ Wage-Hour Guide, 2009 Edition
Presents a first approach to the broad and complex controls under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and other statutes regulating employee wages and hours.

Learn More »

LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW — 3/19/08

Title VII bias claim based on "familial status" not actionable

A husband, wife and daughter could not assert a prima facie case of sex discrimination under Title VII based on "familial status" after they were discharged from a nonprofit agency in part because the father's hiring and direct supervision of the wife and daughter "were ill-advised under the company's discretionary anti-nepotism policy," the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled. (Adamson v Multi Cmty Diversified Servs, Inc, 10thCir, 90 EPD ¶43,109)

The court dismissed the contention that the proffered reason for discharge constituted direct evidence of discrimination against them based on their status as husband, wife and daughter. It rejected the assertion that “familial status” was a protected classification at all. “Familial status” is not is not a classification based on sex, but rather, is gender neutral. Thus, the claims stated no cognizable cause of action under Title VII.

Moreover, their traditional sex discrimination claims were “inextricably entwined with their ‘familial status’ theory of relief,” and, therefore, did not survive summary judgment either. The plaintiffs alleged the anti-nepotism policy was applied to terminate them but was not used to terminate a father-son duo or a mother-daughter pair. But on these facts, “no discriminatory pattern or disproportionality between men and women is evident at all,” said the court.

For more information on this and other topics, consult CCH Employment Practices Guide or CCH Labor Relations.

Visit our News Library to read more news stories.