I will wait to draft the detailed post once the Supreme
Court has actually ruled, but for those who are following SCOTUS oral
arguments, one of the big employment cases of this term was heard on Nov. 25.
Here is what you need to know about Vance v. Ball State:
The issue is whether the "supervisor" liability rule
established by the Ellerth and Faragher cases applies to (1)
harassment by those individuals the employer vests with authority to direct and
oversee the employee's daily work or (2) is limited to individuals who
have the power to "hire, fire, demote, promote, transfer, or discipline" the
Why do we care how the term "supervisor" is defined?
How do I think this case will come out?
SCOTUSblog has a great argument recap that breaks down
the positions of the various justices. It turns out this case may not have been
the case to raise the debated issue about the definition of
"supervisor." Due to some weaknesses in the case, the evidence may not even
establish that the complaint was even with a supervisor. It looks like we will
just have to wait and see on this one...
Read more articles on employment law issues
at Employment and the
Law, a blog by Ashley Kasarjian.
For more information about LexisNexis
products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.