Fresh Fodder For Discrimination Suits

WASHINGTON, D.C.: The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that former employees are entitled to the same protection against retaliation as are current employees or job applicants who have accused a company of racial discrimination. Otherwise, wrote Justice Clarence Thomas, who served at one time as head of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, employees who have suffered from discrimination will shy away from complaining to the Commission, fearing that the move could hurt their chances for future employment. The case centered on former Shell sales representative Charles Robinson, a black man who sued Shell for racial discrimination after being fired in 1991 and subsequently received a negative reference from his former employer. So Robinson sued again, claiming that company officials who gave the recommendation were influenced by his previously unsuccessful discrimination suit. Lawyers for the Justice Department, which picked up Robinson's suit on appeal, added that without the retaliation provision, employers would have a "perverse incentive" to fire workers who might bring discrimination claims. Straightforward as the ruling sounds, however, its implications could be wide-ranging. The ruling, for example, does not specify the boundaries for filing retaliation suits in connection with bad job references. That oversight could mean plenty of fresh fodder down the road for a whole new class of race-bias suits.