The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing arguments in a discrimination case involving University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, and justices seem divided as to whether the court should affirm a physician's discrimination lawsuit against the hospital, according to a Reuters report.
The court is hearing the case of University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center vs. Naiel Nassar, MD. The appeal specifically asks whether an employee must prove the sole reason for an employer's action was retaliation or if an employee can make a successful discrimination claim if retaliation was at least one of two or more motivating factors, according to the report.
Dr. Nassar claims his direct supervisor made discriminatory remarks about his religious background when he was an associate professor at the hospital and a physician at its affiliated AIDS clinic. Seeking a new supervisor, Dr. Nassar sought to become a direct employee of the clinic where he was working rather than remaining a university employee. He told management about his manager's discriminatory practices, and management allegedly intervened and prevented the clinic from hiring him directly.
Dr. Nassar claims UT Southwestern's alleged action was retaliatory for his discrimination complaints. The medical center claims he was not hired directly because of a pre-existing policy between the university and the hospital.
Dr. Nassar's attorney argued before the Supreme Court that statutory language and court precedent support interpreting the Civil Rights Act's Title VII retaliation provision as permitting "mixed motive" claims.
The medical center's legal team said the law as written requires retaliation be the only reason, or the "but for" cause of an employer's action.
EEOC Files Suit Against Baptist Health South Florida
Cook County in Illinois to Pay $2.6M to 3 Fired Physicians
The court is hearing the case of University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center vs. Naiel Nassar, MD. The appeal specifically asks whether an employee must prove the sole reason for an employer's action was retaliation or if an employee can make a successful discrimination claim if retaliation was at least one of two or more motivating factors, according to the report.
Dr. Nassar claims his direct supervisor made discriminatory remarks about his religious background when he was an associate professor at the hospital and a physician at its affiliated AIDS clinic. Seeking a new supervisor, Dr. Nassar sought to become a direct employee of the clinic where he was working rather than remaining a university employee. He told management about his manager's discriminatory practices, and management allegedly intervened and prevented the clinic from hiring him directly.
Dr. Nassar claims UT Southwestern's alleged action was retaliatory for his discrimination complaints. The medical center claims he was not hired directly because of a pre-existing policy between the university and the hospital.
Dr. Nassar's attorney argued before the Supreme Court that statutory language and court precedent support interpreting the Civil Rights Act's Title VII retaliation provision as permitting "mixed motive" claims.
The medical center's legal team said the law as written requires retaliation be the only reason, or the "but for" cause of an employer's action.
More Articles on Hospitals and Lawsuits:
Physicians File Motion to Halt Sale of St. Luke's Episcopal to Catholic Health InitiativesEEOC Files Suit Against Baptist Health South Florida
Cook County in Illinois to Pay $2.6M to 3 Fired Physicians