Search form

Missouri Legislature Passes Sweeping Reforms to Employment Discrimination Law

By Brian J. Christensen
  • May 9, 2017

The Missouri legislature has passed a bill that makes sweeping amendments to the Missouri Human Rights Act, including adopting the “motivating factor” standard for employment discrimination claims and excluding individuals from liability, among other things.

The measure, Senate Bill 43, was passed in the House of Representatives on May 8, 2017. It had already passed in the Senate. If signed by Governor Eric Greitens, which is anticipated, SB 43 will become effective on August 28, 2017.

Key Provisions

The bill:

  • Eliminates the “contributing factor” standard in favor of the “motivating factor” standard
    • To prove unlawful discrimination, the plaintiff must show the employee’s protected classification actually played a role in the adverse employment action or decision and was a determinative influence on the adverse decision or action (currently, the plaintiff must prove that discrimination merely contributed to the adverse employment action)
    • The plaintiff also must prove the adverse action was the direct proximate cause of the claimed damages
  • Excludes individuals from liability under the Missouri Human Rights Act
  • Requires the Missouri Human Rights Commission to make jurisdictional findings in all its decisions
  • Permits employers to raise the defense of untimely filing of a charge at any time during the administrative phase or at an appropriate time in litigation
  • Caps damages under the Missouri Human Rights Act to back pay, interest on back pay, and:
    • $50,000 for employers with between 5 and 100 employees
    • $100,000 for employers with between 100 and 200 employees
    • $200,000 for employers with between 200 and 500 employees
    • $500,000 for employers with more than 500 employees
  • Leaves attorney’s fees available to prevailing plaintiffs
  • Creates the “Whistleblower’s Protection Act” to provide a cause of action for employers who discharge employees who:
    • Report an unlawful act of the employer
    • Report an unlawful act to the employer
    • Refuse to carry out unlawful directives of the employer
    • Engage in conduct otherwise protected by statute or regulation where the statute or regulation does not provide for a private cause of action

Under the new Whistleblower Protection Act, an employee can recover actual, but not punitive, damages.

Implications

Once they go into effect, the amendments are expected to have a dramatic impact on the employment law landscape in Missouri, particularly in single-plaintiff employment cases. Because SB 43 eliminates the possibility of multi-million dollar verdicts, it likely will reduce the number of claims filed, as well as the settlement value of claims that are filed, and the cost of employer practices liability insurance should be reduced over time.

Further, more cases initially will be filed in or removed to federal court because of the elimination of individual liability. This likely will result in more cases being dismissed short of trial.

Finally, given the caps on damages, more cases may be tried given the significant reduction of risk in some jurisdictions.

***

Please contact your Jackson Lewis attorney to discuss these developments and what they may mean to your specific organization.

©2017 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

February 23, 2018

Foreign Parent Company is Joint Employer with Subsidiary for Employment Claims, Court Rules

February 23, 2018

A foreign parent company can be held jointly liable for employment claims against its U.S. subsidiary, a federal district court has held. Middlebrooks v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., No. 17-00412 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 1, 2018). The employee brought claims against his former employer, Teva USA, and its parent company, Teva Israel, alleging... Read More

February 20, 2018

Ban-the-Box Laws in Spokane, Washington, and Kansas City, Missouri

February 20, 2018

State and local jurisdictions have continued to consider and enact legislation restricting employers from inquiring about a job applicant’s criminal background during the initial stages of the application process. Two of the latest enactments are in Spokane, Washington, and Kansas City, Missouri. Some ban-the-box ordinances are... Read More

February 12, 2018

EEOC: Retaliation Tops Discrimination Charges Filed in Fiscal Year 2017

February 12, 2018

Retaliation was the most common workplace discrimination charge received by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in fiscal year (FY) 2017, according to the agency. (The fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30.) Retaliation has been at the top since FY 2010. A total of 84,254 charges were filed with the agency... Read More

Related Practices