employment discrimination

Employee v. Employer; Austrian Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof); decision dated May 26, 2014– 8 ObA 55/13s

According to the court's decision, the employer bears the burden of proof for the grounds for termination and dismissal asserted by the employer. If the employer bases termination on the possibility that the employee falsely accused her superior of sexual harassment, the employer must prove that the employee knowingly made false accusations, thus providing a valid reason for termination.

Facts of the Case

Mitu Gulati et al., Judging Women, 8 Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 504-532 (2011). Available at: https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/faculty_scholarship/2271/ 

The Sex Discrimination Act is federal legislation which applies to the whole of Australia. There is considerable overlap with State and territory anti-discrimination legislation (although with some differences in scope and exceptions). As a result, a complainant may have legal avenues under this Act and also under State or territory legislation.

A woman filed a complaint against the Illinois Department of Corrections alleging that she had been sexually harassed by her immediate supervisor, and was discharged in retaliation after she opposed the harassment and filed charges. An Administrative Law Judge found the harassment sufficient to create a hostile work environment and determined that her dismissal was retaliatory. Her reinstatement and monetary relief were recommended. The Illinois Human Rights Commission upheld the decision, awarding the woman back pay, benefits, medical expenses, attorneys' fees, and costs.