Minnesota Marital Status Discrimination Law Clarified
It seems like I have been blogging a lot recently about discrimination cases, but new and interesting cases keep coming across my desk. Here is yet another. Earlier this spring, the Minnesota Court of Appeals interpreted a 22-year old amendment to the definition of “marital status” under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA). The court found for the plaintiff in Taylor v. LSI Corporation of America, (Minn. App. 4/27/2010) (pdf), stating in order to have an actionable claim of marital status discrimination, it is not necessary to show the alleged discrimination was a direct attack on the institution of marriage. In Taylor v. LSI Corporation of America, Ms. Taylor claims she was let go from her job just because her husband, who was in management at LSI, was being forced to resign his employment with the corporation.
The court’s decision is based on a 1988 legislative amendment to the MHRA which defined marital status in employment cases to include “protection against discrimination on the basis of the identity, situation, actions, or beliefs of a spouse or former spouse.” Minn. Stat. § 363A.03, subd. 24. The Court wrote, “The crux of appellant's claim is that LSI terminated her based on the identity and situation of her spouse, a co-employee whose forced resignation was occurring at the same time. This claim falls squarely within the statutory definition of "marital status."”
The case has been remanded back to the District Court for further proceedings.
What should employers take away from this case?
1) Consider each employee’s continued employment on the merits of his/her performance.
2) What is good for the goose is not necessarily, what is good for the gander.
3) Lastly, don’t automatically terminate the employment of one spouse, just because another spouse is being terminated.
