On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court begins its new term, and is currently scheduled to hear arguments on three notable employment law cases over the coming months as well as a case that is certain to interpret the recent employment class action case, Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011).
On November 26, argument will be held on Vance v. Ball State University, Docket No. 11-556. In Vance, the Supreme Court is expected to clarify the seemingly simple matter of how the term “supervisor” is defined under Title VII. Under Title VII, an employer may be liable for unlawful discrimination against its employees, 42 U.S.C. 2000E-2(A), and may be vicariously liable for a supervisor’s harassment of employees. (See Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, 807 (1998); Burlington Indus. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742, 764-65 (1998).) According to Maetta Vance’s petition for certiorari, the issue is whether a “supervisor” is limited under Title VII to those supervisors with authority to, for example, terminate or discipline employees, or if it includes any employee who has authority to oversee another employee’s daily activities.
