6th Circuit: Protected activity not a shield from discipline for workplace misconduct

In a recent decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit (whose rulings apply to all employers in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee) reaffirmed an important principle for employers: Employees who engage in protected activity under antidiscrimination laws are not immune from discipline if they separately violate workplace rules.

Harassment complaint followed by termination for misconduct

Gertrude Crisp alleged that she had experienced workplace harassment by a coworker and had previously reported it to management. Years later, she was terminated after engaging in conduct the employer determined violated workplace standards and policies. 

Crisp claimed her termination was unlawful retaliation because her conduct occurred while discussing concerns related to the coworker’s prior behavior. The employer maintained the termination was based on her own workplace misconduct, not her earlier harassment complaints.

Antiretaliation protections have limits 

The 6th Circuit sided with the employer and dismissed the retaliation claim. The court recognized that reporting or opposing workplace harassment is generally protected activity under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. However, it emphasized that antiretaliation protections have limits.