holding that “an adverse employment action ... [sufficient to support a x-etaliation claim is] a materially adverse change in the terms and conditions of employment”
How later courts described this case
- holding that “an adverse employment action ... [sufficient to support a x-etaliation claim is] a materially adverse change in the terms and conditions of employment”
- “The realities of the workplace dictate that employees do not always have the option to work in the location they desire. Employees must often go where the employer determines they are needed most .... ”
- allegations of constant harassment without recall of the exact dates and circumstances could constitute pervasive harassment
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
This record has no opinion text. It is a disposition such as a denial of certiorari, kept so the case can be found by name and citation.