 
William T. Wilson, Esquire
All Pennsylvania employers are now subject to discrimination claims in court - regardless of their size
A recent decision of the Pennsylvania Superior Court significantly expands
the potential liabilities of small employers in the Commonwealth. Businesses
operating with less than four employees should take note of the Court's
ruling to ensure compliance with all Federal and state employment-related
laws.
As employers have known for decades, the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act makes
it unlawful to discriminate against employees based on race, color, religious
creed, ancestry, age, sex, national origin, or non-job related handicap
or disability, as well as a few other considerations. The application
of the Human Relations Act to private employers, however, is limited to
those employing four or more persons within the Commonwealth. This offers
employers no security from claims of racial discrimination, because the
Civil Rights Act of 1866, a Federal statute, provides for claims of that
nature and applies to all employment relationships, regardless of the
size of the business. Federal statutes relating to gender, age, disability
and some other kinds of discrimination have higher number of employee
thresholds than the Human Relations Act. Although those kinds of discrimination
are obviously not desirable employment practices, regardless of the size
of the of the employer, smaller businesses had reason to feel that their
decisions would not be subject to some kinds of "second-guessing"
in court.
Since the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's 1974 decision in Geary v. U.S. Steel
Corp, another theory of employer liability for terminations that violate
a clearly defined public policy has been developing. The Human Relations
Act states a rather clear public policy against all enumerated types of
discrimination, but the Supreme Court decided in 1989 that the procedures
under the Human Relations Act were the exclusive remedy, preempting all
others, for the kinds of policy violations it covers. In that case, Clay
v. Advanced Computer Applications, Inc., the Court emphasized that an
aggrieved party was not deprived of access to the courts, but was required
to file a complaint with the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission and
participate in its investigation of the prescribed period of time before
seeking a remedy in court. Based upon Clay, it was widely believed that
claims for wrongful discharge based on then kinds of discrimination covered
by the Human Relations Act were limited to those that could be brought
under that statute-namely, those against employers with four or more employees.
The New Rule
In October 2005, the Superior Court issued a decision upholding the right
of an employee to pursue a claim for sexual harassment, a form of gender
discrimination, as a violation of public policy even though the employer
had fewer than four employees. Although this claim was not made under
the Human Relations Act, it was still allowed because the plaintiff had
filed a complaint with the Human Relations Commission. The act of filing
this complaint was pointless for all other reasons, since the Commission
has no jurisdiction to investigate employers with fewer than four employees
and will inevitably dismiss the complaint, but it fulfills the Supreme
Court's requirement for following the procedures of the Human Relations
Act under the Superior Court's decision in Weaver v. Harpster & Shipman
Financial Services.
This recent decision makes all Pennsylvania employers subject to claims
in court for gender, age, religion, and disability discrimination - regardless
of their size. It also has some impact on larger out-of-state employers
who have small Pennsylvania workforces of fewer than four, because the
Human Relations Act allows for remedies that cannot be obtained under
the analogous Federal statutes. Until the Supreme Court decides otherwise,
this decision has great significance to those employers with a total workforce
of less than four employees.
Click here to view
the author's biography.
MacElree Harvey
17 West Miner Street
Post Office Box 660
West Chester, PA 19381–0660
p | 610.436.0100
f | 610.430.7885
f | 610.429.4486
e | info@macelree.com
The following article is informational only and not intended as legal advice.
Speak with a licensed attorney about your own specific situation.
© Copyright 2006 MacElree Harvey, Ltd. All rights reserved.
|