Retaliation Claim Checker

Protected activity includes filing an EEOC charge, making an internal complaint about discrimination or harassment, participating in an investigation or proceeding, opposing a discriminatory practice (such as refusing to carry out a discriminatory order), requesting a reasonable accommodation under the ADA, or testifying or assisting in any Title VII proceeding. The activity must be based on a good-faith, reasonable belief that discrimination occurred. You do not need to use specific legal terminology when making your complaint; you simply need to convey that you believe unlawful discrimination is occurring.

Under the landmark case Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White (2006), the Supreme Court established a broad standard: an adverse action is anything that would dissuade a reasonable worker from engaging in protected activity. This includes obvious actions like termination, demotion, and pay cuts, but also subtler forms such as negative performance reviews, unfavorable schedule changes, increased scrutiny, exclusion from meetings, transfer to less desirable duties, and threats. The standard is broader than what qualifies as an adverse employment action for discrimination claims under Title VII Section 703.

There is no fixed time limit, but temporal proximity is a key factor in establishing causation. Retaliation occurring within days or weeks of the protected activity creates a strong inference of causation, which courts have found sufficient standing alone. Actions within 1 to 3 months still support a claim, particularly when combined with other evidence. Beyond 3 to 6 months, temporal proximity alone is generally insufficient, and courts require additional evidence of a causal connection, such as a pattern of antagonism, shifting explanations, or departure from established procedures.

No. You do not need to prove that actual discrimination occurred. You only need to show that you had a good-faith, reasonable belief that the conduct you opposed or reported was discriminatory. Even if the underlying discrimination complaint is ultimately found to be without merit, you are still protected from retaliation for having raised it in good faith. This is an important protection because it ensures employees are not discouraged from reporting suspected discrimination by fear that their complaint must be proven correct.

Under the Burlington Northern framework and Title VII Section 704(a), a retaliation claim requires three elements: (1) the employee engaged in protected activity, (2) the employer took a materially adverse action, and (3) there is a causal connection between the protected activity and the adverse action. If the employee establishes this prima facie case, the burden shifts to the employer under the McDonnell Douglas framework to provide a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for the action. The burden then shifts back to the employee to show that the stated reason is pretextual -- meaning it is false or not the real reason for the action. Evidence of pretext can include inconsistent explanations, departures from policy, comparative treatment of other employees, and suspicious timing.