Retaliation is Now #1

If you haven’t watched The Good Wife yet, I urge you to do so. Not since LA Law have I seen such an intelligent and challenging treatment of complex societal issues. I remember a specific episode of LA Law where the argument was for or against punishing an inmate (serving life without possibility of parole) with the death penalty for killing another inmate. It might have been during that very hour that I lost forever my black and white view of the world and I don’t think I’ve used the words “always” and “never” since.

The Good Wife is just as compelling, but also on personal and relationship issues. Well written, it demands you use your intelligence to sort through the complexities of the issues being addressed.

One complex, layered issue I recall was when President Nixon denied knowing about the Watergate break-in. Which was worse, the doing it or the denying it? My Lai massacre. Enron. It is a long list, and it stretches all the way into HR.

What prompted this walk down Memory Lane was a recent US Supreme Court decision and the news that retaliation is now the number one reason employees bring charges against their employers. The good news is: race discrimination is no longer the most common claim. Seriously, think about that. That has to be good news, doesn’t it? We are making progress in tolerance of racial diversity in the workplace. Well, no, the race numbers didn’t go down so much as the retaliation numbers went up. The rest of the bad news is that retaliation is even more complicated now that the Court has determined that a retaliation claim may have merit even if the original complaint (which prompted the retaliation) is not a protected activity. Huh?

I sound like I am complaining, but from what I know of the court case it sounds like retaliation for sure. Boyfriend and girlfriend worked for the same company: three weeks after the girlfriend filed a sexual harassment compliant the boyfriend was fired. The Supreme Court determined that firing the boyfriend was designed to punish the girlfriend/claimant. So, even though the boyfriend did not have a claim himself, he could still sue for retaliation. The Court did not offer an opinion on the level of relationship that would meet their criteria: good friends? Ex-lovers? Married for 30 years? How long ago did they break up? My therapist would have a lot to say about relationship individuation issues here.

A 2010 Equal Employment Opportunity investigation was over before it started when it was clear that retaliation had taken place. That’s right – the original claim did not have to be investigated because the retaliation was so blatant it, in effect, proved the claim. The physics of discrimination.

The take-away here is that the denial or retaliation can be as bad – or worse -- than the original crime. Hence my memory of Watergate. And my brother denying he picked the flowers he sweetly gave to my mom out of Mrs. Thompson’s yard.