Wisconsin
How Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White applies in Wisconsin: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Employment Law.
Wisconsin law generally mirrors the principles established in Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White, emphasizing that retaliation against employees for engaging in protected activities is strictly prohibited. The state's approach upholds a broad interpretation of what constitutes an adverse employment action.
In Wisconsin, an adverse employment action includes any action that would dissuade a reasonable employee from engaging in protected activities, including but not limited to filing a complaint or participating in investigations.
The court held that an employer’s reduction of hours and shift changes constituted retaliatory action under Wisconsin's Fair Employment Act, resonating with Burlington Northern’s emphasis on adverse actions.
The court determined that an employee's transfer to a less favorable position after filing a complaint constituted retaliation, reinforcing the concept from Burlington Northern regarding the interpretation of adverse actions.
The decision highlighted the principles of retaliation from Burlington Northern, finding that a lack of promotion following a discrimination complaint was retaliatory in nature.
Wisconsin's approach aligns closely with the federal standard outlined in Burlington Northern. However, Wisconsin law provides broader interpretations of retaliation and adverse employment actions, ensuring greater protection for employees against employer retaliation.
Candidates should prepare to analyze elements of retaliation claims based on Burlington Northern principles, as understanding state-specific applications can be crucial for the Wisconsin bar exam.