Employers are being warned in the wake of an appeals court case to take extra care with discrimination and harassment investigations, because "cat’s paw" liability is poised to reach out and claw them.
The employment law experts reading this are most likely nodding their heads in agreement, while the rest of you are probably scratching your heads in puzzlement.
The employee in the case, Andrea Vasquez, complained about sexual harassment, but she’s the one who got fired. She said the accused harasser supplied false information, and the employer relied on his fabricated evidence in concluding that Vasquez herself engaged in harassing conduct.
This is where we decipher the "cat’s paw" idiom, which refers to using someone as a tool or getting them to do your dirty work. It comes from a fable in which a monkey convinces a cat to scoop roasting chestnuts out of a fire. The monkey eats the chestnuts, and all the cat gets for its troubles is a burned paw.
Under the cat’s paw theory of liability, the employer’s the one that can get burned if it's shown that a nonbiased supervisor who made the decision to discipline an employee was influenced to do so by another worker who harbored a discriminatory or retaliatory intent against the employee. When applied to the case at hand, the cat’s paw doctrine means there’s a potential for liability even if the employer fired Vasquez based on an honest belief that she engaged in misconduct.
Vasquez claims the investigation was flawed, and the employer should have known that the co-worker was making accusations against her in order to retaliate. A federal appeals court found that Vasquez has a viable case under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and it overturned a lower court’s dismissal of her retaliation claims (Vasquez v. Empress Ambulance Serv., Inc., 2016 BL 280409, 2d Cir., No. 15-03239, 8/29/16).
What Vasquez complained to her employer about was receiving unsolicited advances and a sexual photograph from a male co-worker. According to the court’s opinion, she promptly informed her supervisor and filed a formal harassment complaint, which her employer promised to investigate. The co-worker allegedly found out he was being reported, manipulated an exchange of text messages with someone else, and presented the texts as evidence of a consensual relationship with Vasquez.
Despite her denials and an offer to hand over her own cell phone to show that no such messaging had occurred, Vasquez said the employer accepted the co-worker’s false information as "proof" of improper conduct. There was no further investigation, and Vasquez was fired for sexual harassment the same day she filed her complaint.
The appeals court’s ruling means she’ll get a chance to show that the employer is liable for retaliation because of its alleged negligence in handling the situation.
And what was that negligence? The employer allegedly allowed the co-worker’s false information to form the sole basis of its termination decision, crediting his "accusations to the exclusion of all other evidence, and specifically declining to examine contrary evidence tendered by Vasquez, when it knew or, with reasonable investigation, should have known" that the co-worker was motivated by an intent to retaliate against Vasquez, the court said.
One reason the ruling’s significant is that it expands cat’s paw liability to include situations where a low-level worker corrupts an otherwise neutral supervisor's decision-making process.
But more importantly for employers and HR professionals, this case should serve as a reminder to take into account not only the information they receive when investigating complaints of harassment and discrimination, but also the source of that information.
In other words, don’t play the credulous cat to the malevolent monkey and get burned by a lawsuit.
All Bloomberg BNA treatises are available on standing order, which ensures you will always receive the most current edition of the book or supplement of the title you have ordered from Bloomberg BNA’s book division. As soon as a new supplement or edition is published (usually annually) for a title you’ve previously purchased and requested to be placed on standing order, we’ll ship it to you to review for 30 days without any obligation. During this period, you can either (a) honor the invoice and receive a 5% discount (in addition to any other discounts you may qualify for) off the then-current price of the update, plus shipping and handling or (b) return the book(s), in which case, your invoice will be cancelled upon receipt of the book(s). Call us for a prepaid UPS label for your return. It’s as simple and easy as that. Most importantly, standing orders mean you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you’re relying on. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.960.1220 or by sending an email to email@example.com.
Put me on standing order at a 5% discount off list price of all future updates, in addition to any other discounts I may quality for. (Returnable within 30 days.)
Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).
This Bloomberg BNA report is available on standing order, which ensures you will all receive the latest edition. This report is updated annually and we will send you the latest edition once it has been published. By signing up for standing order you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you need. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.372.1033, option 5, or by sending us an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Put me on standing order
Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)