Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp.
703 F.3d 966
| 7th Cir. | 2012Background
- Kasten sued Saint-Gobain for retaliation under the FLSA based on oral complaints about time-clock location
- The district court granted summary judgment, holding oral complaints are not protected activity
- The Supreme Court vacated and remanded to require fair notice analysis for protected activity
- On remand, the district court found fair notice but granted summary judgment on causation
- On appeal, the Seventh Circuit reversed and remanded for trial, concluding genuine causation disputes exist
- Key facts include clock-location policy, disciplinary actions, and timing of termination and clock-move actions
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there is a genuine causation dispute under the direct method | Kasten shows suspicious timing and pretext evidence | Saint-Gobain contends no causal link is shown | Yes; triable causation issue exists under direct method |
| Whether Kasten’s oral complaints were protected activity under the fair notice standard | Complaints gave fair notice of rights under the FLSA | No clear, detailed assertion of FLSA rights | Yes; Kasten engaged in protected activity under fair notice |
| Whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment given factual disputes | Disputed timing, pretext, and shifting rationale create material facts | Evidence does not show material factual dispute on causation | Yes; summary judgment reversed for further proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- Cichon v. Exelon Generation Co., L.L.C., 401 F.3d 803 (7th Cir. 2005) (causal proof methods in retaliation claims)
- Volovsek v. Wis. Dep’t of Agric., Trade and Consumer Prot., 344 F.3d 680 (7th Cir. 2003) (circumstantial evidence of retaliation may raise inference of motive)
- Sylvester v. SOS Children’s Vill., Ill., Inc., 453 F.3d 900 (7th Cir. 2006) (direct/circumstantial evidence framework for retaliation)
- Lalvani v. Cook County, Ill., 269 F.3d 785 (7th Cir. 2001) (timing can support inference of causation)
- Simple v. Walgreens Co., 511 F.3d 668 (7th Cir. 2007) (inconsistent explanations suggest pretext when combined with other evidence)
- Stone v. City of Indianapolis Pub. Utils. Div., 281 F.3d 640 (7th Cir. 2002) (direct method elements for retaliation claim)
- Treadwell v. Office of Ill. Sec. of State, 455 F.3d 778 (7th Cir. 2006) (circumstantial evidence relevant to elements of direct claim)
- Stumph v. Thomas & Skinner, Inc., 770 F.2d 93 (7th Cir. 1985) (weighing motive and intent in discrimination cases)
- Appelbaum v. Milwaukee Metro. Sewerage Dist., 340 F.3d 573 (7th Cir. 2003) (courts do not function as super-personnel departments)
- EEOC v. Romeo Community Schools, 976 F.2d 985 (6th Cir. 1992) (fair notice standard for protected activity)