Finding the Goldilocks of Employment Discrimination: The Confusing Approaches to Temporal Proximity.

Authors

Jordan Roling

Abstract

There has been substantial discourse between federal circuit courts in determining causality for employment discrimination cases. The article begins with a real-life case of a woman diagnosed with potentially cancerous tumors who, after filing an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) complaint, faced adverse actions by her employer. The central question is how temporal proximity, the time between the complaint and adverse actions, plays a role in determining causality. The article examines the varying approaches of different circuit courts, some of which rely solely on temporal proximity to establish a causal connection, while others demand additional evidence. It also discusses the widespread use of summary judgment, which often results in the dismissal of employment discrimination cases. The article argues that the burden on plaintiffs should be lightened, and more cases should go before juries where juries can make informed decisions. The article proposes modifications to the McDonnell Douglas framework to eliminate the requirement for additional evidence and reduce the burden of proof for plaintiffs. This is to ensure that more cases are heard by juries, potentially offering a fairer outcome for plaintiffs in employment discrimination cases. The article sug-gests that these changes may require action from lawmakers or judges and high-lights the importance of addressing this issue in the current legal landscape.

First Page

319

Recommended Citation

Jordan Roling, Finding the Goldilocks of Employment Discrimination: The Confusing Approaches to Temporal Proximity., 7 Bus. Entrepreneurship & Tax L. Rev. 319 (2024).
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/betr/vol7/iss2/10