Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp., 651 F.3d 482, 487 (6th Cir.

the circumstances around the adverse action give way to a reasonable inference that the disability of the relative or associate was the determining factor in the employer’s decision.

they were known by their employer to have a relative or associate with a disability and.

they were subjected to an adverse action.

they were qualified for the job at the time of the adverse action.

The exact legal standard varies depending on the law under which the claim is being raised. Generally, courts impose a similar burden on associational discrimination cases as they do under other discrimination cases. For example, to establish a prima facie case of associational discrimination under the ADA, a plaintiff must show that: What legal standards govern associational discrimination claims?Īssociational discrimination claims are generally analyzed like claims of direct discrimination. Usually, a plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of discrimination, including showing that they suffered an adverse employment action and that they can link it to a protected class or activity under the law. of Health, the Court found that plaintiffs who were fired for public policy advocacy on behalf of individuals with AIDS were not protected under the ADA because they failed to allege a connection with any specific disabled individual. “Association,” however, is not a limitless term. In Oliveras-Sifre v. International Business Machines Corp., 370 F.3d 698, 702 (7th Cir. What types of relationships constitute an “association”?Īn “association” can encompass a wide variety of relationships. Courts interpreting the ADA’s “relationship or association” language have construed it broadly, finding that it may include “a family, business, social or other relationship.” Larimer v. This means that employees cannot suffer adverse actions simply because someone they associate with engaged in legally-protected activity, such as blowing the whistle. Employees who do suffer such actions may have a legal cause of action. North American Stainless that this also prohibited an employer from terminating a whistleblower’s fiancé, reasoning that this “well might have dissuaded a reasonable worker from making or supporting a charge of discrimination.” No. §2000e–3(a). The Supreme Court held in Thompson v. Some laws that prohibit retaliation for protected activities also recognize and protect against associational retaliation. Where the statute doesn’t directly prohibit associational retaliation, courts have also given broad interpretations that favor protection for the associates of whistleblowers.įor example, the anti-retaliation provision of Title VII states only that “t shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer to discriminate against any of his employees. 2017)(holding – three years before SCOTUS’s decision in Bostock – that employees in same-sex relationships were protected from discrimination based on their association with partners of a certain sex). Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana, 853 F.3d 339 (7th Cir. 14, 2015)(holding that employee who was harassed due to his wife’s religion was protected ) Hively v.

1999)(holding that employee who was discriminated against for having a biracial child was protected under Title VII) Chiara v. Elliott Popham Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick, and GMC Trucks, Inc., 173 F.3d 988 (6th Cir. at 139. Numerous other courts have applied a similar associational discrimination analysis, including to cases dealing with other protected characteristics under Title VII. “The reason is simple: where an employee is subjected to adverse action because an employer disapproves of interracial association, the employee suffers discrimination because of the employee's own race.” Holcomb involved a white basketball coach who was fired because his employer was unhappy that he was married to a Black woman. The court found that this fell within Title VII’s bar on discrimination, holding:

Iona College, a federal appellate court explained the rationale for reading associational discrimination into Title VII. And associational discrimination claims can be brought under laws other than the ADA. For example, courts have held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees from discrimination on the basis of their associates’ race, gender, religion, and/or national origin. Even though Title VII does not explicitly prohibit discrimination by association like the ADA does, courts have found that Title VII does bar this type of discrimination.

Associational montage definition