On November 1, 2022, in Dusel v. Factory Mutual Ins. Co., the First Circuit Court of Appeals held that “close temporal proximity” alone does not establish pretext as this evidence “must be considered alongside the . . . record.” Nor does mere close temporal proximity establish pretext where the employer has a legitimate business reason for taking adverse action against the employee, and more particularly, where the employer subsequently discovers the employee’s misconduct in a separate, unrelated matter. Dusel is a win for employers because it signals that engaging in protected activity will not immunize an employee from the consequences of misconduct that violates company policy if the employer enforces its policy consistently and documents the reasons underlying the employee’s discipline.
Blog Editors
Recent Updates
- Video: New H-1B Visa Fee, EEOC Shutters Disparate Impact Cases, Key Labor Roles Confirmed - Employment Law This Week
- New $100,000 H-1B Fee Proclamation – Implications and Action Steps
- Video: FTC Backs Off Non-Compete Ban, Warns Health Care Employers - Employment Law This Week
- Artificial Intelligence and Disparate Impact Liability: How the EEOC’s End to Disparate Impact Claims Affects Workplace AI
- Reminder: Massachusetts Salary Range Disclosure Requirements Take Effect in October