The majority thus ignores Robinson and resorts to its unsanctioned "original intent" methodology, presumably because it cannot adequately square the result it reaches with the Act’s substantive context, that is, the literal words of § 216(b) affording victims of retaliation the alternative reme- dies of "reinstatement" and "employment." Obviously, only former employees can be reinstated, leaving the remedy of employment to those who cannot be reinstated, i.e., those, like Dellinger, who have yet to be employed.
Monday, August 15, 2011
No FLSA retaliation claim available to prospective employees
The Fourth Circuit, in a divided opinion, holds the retaliation protections of the Fair Labor Standards Act apply only to current and former employees of an employer, not prospective employees. In Dellinger v. Science Applications International the majority finds this result compelled by the statutory language. Relying on Robinson v. Shell Oil Co., 519 U.S. 337 (1997) which held a former employee can state a retaliation claim under Title VII for conduct occurring after termination of the employment relationship, the dissent argues the Plaintiff states a claim. Money quote after the jump.
Labels:
Dellinger,
FLSA,
fourth circuit,
prospective employees,
retaliation