ARTICLE
30 October 2015

ELL SCOTUS SERIES: # 1 – Green v. Brennan

SS
Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Contributor

With more than 900 lawyers across 18 offices, Seyfarth Shaw LLP provides advisory, litigation, and transactional legal services to clients worldwide. Our high-caliber legal representation and advanced delivery capabilities allow us to take on our clients’ unique challenges and opportunities-no matter the scale or complexity. Whether navigating complex litigation, negotiating transformational deals, or advising on cross-border projects, our attorneys achieve exceptional legal outcomes. Our drive for excellence leads us to seek out better ways to work with our clients and each other. We have been first-to-market on many legal service delivery innovations-and we continue to break new ground with our clients every day. This long history of excellence and innovation has created a culture with a sense of purpose and belonging for all. In turn, our culture drives our commitment to the growth of our clients, the diversity of our people, and the resilience of our workforce.
Green, an ex-postmaster, filed suit against the Postmaster General in Colorado alleging, among other things, that he was constructively discharged when the Postal Service bullied him into retirement...
United States Employment and HR

As the Supreme Court of the United States begins their October 2015 term, the Employment Law Lookout Blog Team wanted to provide our readers with a preview (and then later a "post-view") of the several cases being heard by the "Supremes" that will likely have an impact on the world of employment law. Installment 1, Green v. Brennan, is below.  Be on the "Lookout" for periodic installments in our series.

And then check back for the post-decision analysis, to get insight and analysis on how the SCOTUS opinion may impact you and your employees.  Enjoy!

When Does the Clock Start Ticking?
SCOTUS to Decide When the
Filing Period
for Constructive Discharge Claims Starts Running

On April 27, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeal of Green v. Brennan, a Tenth Circuit case holding that the filing period for constructive discharge claims starts running with the employer's last discriminatory act, not when the employee resigns.

Green, an ex-postmaster, filed suit against the Postmaster General in Colorado alleging, among other things, that he was constructively discharged when the Postal Service bullied him into retirement by launching a formal criminal investigation against him and then forcing him into a settlement agreement that required a significant demotion or retirement. Upholding the District Court's decision, the Tenth Circuit found that Green's constructive discharge claim was time-barred because signing the settlement agreement was the "last discriminatory act" triggering the applicable filing deadline, which Green failed to meet.

The only issue to be decided by the Supreme Court is whether the filing period for constructive discharge claims starts running at the time of the employer's last discriminatory act or when the employee resigns.

Majority View. Although few courts have addressed this issue, either under Title VII or in other contexts, the majority find constructive discharge claims accrue when the employee resigns or "gives notice of departure."

Why This Case Is Different. Of the few cases addressing the constructive discharge limitations period, those courts chose not to decide between the date of the last discriminatory act and the employee's resignation, finding that the employers "last discriminatory act" was the employee's resignation. The Tenth Circuit scoffed at this reasoning, calling it a "legal fiction" and giving no merit to a view that would allow an employee considerable and indefinite time to contemplate whether the employer's conduct was intolerable.

Why This Case Matters. If the Supreme Court finds that the limitations period for constructive discharge claims does not start running until the employee resigns, employees will be able to indefinitely self-toll the limitations period until they decide it's time to resign. It will also open the door to constructive discharge claims based on an alleged discriminatory act that took place months, or even years prior, even when there is a non-discriminatory, intervening reason for an employee's resignation.  Although Green v. Brennan was decided in the context of a federal employee, this case gives the Supreme Court a chance to clarify an issue that is sure to have significant implications for private sector employees as well.

Stay Tuned... This case is set for oral argument on Monday, November 30, 2015 so be on the lookout for a follow up blog post here when a decision is reached.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More