Performance Improvement Plan Is Not Enough to Support Discrimination Claim

By Thomas McKinney

An employee is required to demonstrate an adverse employment action in order to prevail on a claim of discrimination. Adverse employment actions are typically a termination, demotion, suspension or reduction in pay. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a company placing an employee on a Performance Improvement Plan (commonly referred to as a PIP) is not an adverse employment action pursuant to the Federal Anti-Discrimination laws. See Reynolds v. Dep’t. of the Army, 3rd Circuit, PA, July 22, 2011. Accordingly, in order to prevail on a federal discrimination claim, an employee will be required to demonstrate an adverse employment action beyond a PIP in order to succeed.

August 9, 2011 – Tom McKinney – Castronovo & McKinney

About the Author
Tom McKinney is an experienced NJ Employment Lawyer in all major areas of labor and employment law, including discrimination, harassment, overtime violations, wage and hour claims, sexual harassment, wrongful discharge, Title VII, ADA, ADEA, FMLA, LAD, FLSA, and all other employment law claims. Tom is admitted to practice in the States of New Jersey and New York, United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Southern District of New York, District of New Jersey, and United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Prior to forming the firm, Tom practiced at Gibbons P.C. in Newark, NJ. If you have any questions regarding this article, contact Tom here today.