SimplyHR | Employment & Labor Blog 

“But for,” “motivating factor,” “contributing factor…” Aren’t they all just different legal phrases that ultimately make an employer liable for discriminatory conduct? Absolutely not—and in its first significant employment decision of this term, the United States Supreme Court, by replacing “motivating factor” with “but for,” has made it more difficult for plaintiffs to prove retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”).

For those of us who practice employment law in Missouri, it remains all too fresh in our minds that the difference in these standards can be monumental.

If you’re reading this blog, then it’s probably safe to assume that you heard about the Supreme Court’s decision that the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) is unconstitutional. And it’s probably also safe to assume that you’ve had friends and acquaintances weighing in with their thoughts on the decision on Facebook, LinkedIn and in other venues. Getting lost in the debate, however, is the impact this decision has on how employee benefits are administered.