The recent Supreme Court decision in Staub v. Proctor Hospital<\/em> highlights the liability an employer can face from discrimination claims. The court ruling shows that even when a manager or boss ultimately decides to fire an employee, if a subordinate supervisor influences or discriminates against an employee that leads to an action against the employee overall, the employer may be liable.<\/p>\n Vincent Staub filed a grievance after he was let go as an angiography technician at a Peoria, Ill. hospital as he felt he was let go because of his bosses \u201chostility toward his military obligations\u201d.<\/p>\n Staub sued saying that the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) forbids an employer from denying \u201cemployment, reemployment, retention in employment, promotion, or any benefit of employment based on a person\u2019s membership in or obligation to perform service in a uniformed service and provides that liability is established if the person\u2019s membership is (more…)<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The recent Supreme Court decision in Staub v. Proctor Hospital highlights the liability an employer can face from discrimination claims. The court ruling shows that even when a manager or boss ultimately decides to fire an employee, if a subordinate…<\/span><\/p>\n