Constructive Discharge under Title VII and the ADEA
Constructive Discharge Under Title VII and the ADEA
Finnegan, Sheila. The University of Chicago Law Review. Chicago: Spring
1986. Vol. 53, Iss. 2; pg. 561, 20 pgs
This material is copyrighted by the University of Chicago Law Review.
Further electronic distribution of this material is a violation of this copyright.
COMMENTS
Constructive Discharge Under Title VII and the ADEA
Consider two employees who are victims of sexual harrassment. The first employee is fired after she refuses to accede to the repeated sexual demands of her supervisor. The second employee is also propositioned,but considers the workingenvironmentso intolerable that she resigns before any adverse action is taken against her. Each woman then sues her employer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.1
Both employers may have violated Title VII.2 Even so, because of the way in which their employment was terminated the two employees may be entitled to different remedies. The first employee-who was fired-would presumptively be entitled to backpay for the wages lost after the date of firing.3In contrast, the
1 Pub. L. No.
88-352, ?? 701-716,78 Stat. 253 (1964) (codifiedas amendedat 42 U.S.C.
?? 2000e to 2000e-17 (1982)) [hereinaftercited as Title VII].
Section 703(a) of Title VII provides:
(a) It shall be an unlawfulemploymentpractice for an employer(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to dischargeany individual,or otherwiseto discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation,terms, conditions, or privilegesof employment,because of such individual'srace, color, religion,sex, or national origin;or
(2) to limit, segregate,or classify his employees or applicants for employmentin any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individualof employmentopportunities or otherwiseadverselyaffect his status as an employee, because of such individual's race, color, religion,sex, or national origin.
42 U.S.C. ? 2000e-2(a) (1982).
In addition, section 704(a)
Finnegan, Sheila. The University of Chicago Law Review. Chicago: Spring
1986. Vol. 53, Iss. 2; pg. 561, 20 pgs
This material is copyrighted by the University of Chicago Law Review.
Further electronic distribution of this material is a violation of this copyright.
COMMENTS
Constructive Discharge Under Title VII and the ADEA
Consider two employees who are victims of sexual harrassment. The first employee is fired after she refuses to accede to the repeated sexual demands of her supervisor. The second employee is also propositioned,but considers the workingenvironmentso intolerable that she resigns before any adverse action is taken against her. Each woman then sues her employer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.1
Both employers may have violated Title VII.2 Even so, because of the way in which their employment was terminated the two employees may be entitled to different remedies. The first employee-who was fired-would presumptively be entitled to backpay for the wages lost after the date of firing.3In contrast, the
1 Pub. L. No.
88-352, ?? 701-716,78 Stat. 253 (1964) (codifiedas amendedat 42 U.S.C.
?? 2000e to 2000e-17 (1982)) [hereinaftercited as Title VII].
Section 703(a) of Title VII provides:
(a) It shall be an unlawfulemploymentpractice for an employer(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to dischargeany individual,or otherwiseto discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation,terms, conditions, or privilegesof employment,because of such individual'srace, color, religion,sex, or national origin;or
(2) to limit, segregate,or classify his employees or applicants for employmentin any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individualof employmentopportunities or otherwiseadverselyaffect his status as an employee, because of such individual's race, color, religion,sex, or national origin.
42 U.S.C. ? 2000e-2(a) (1982).
In addition, section 704(a)