CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT SETS NEW STANDARD

FOR EMPLOYEE RETALIATION CLAIM

In a 4-2 decision, the California Supreme Court has ruled that a former L'Oreal USA sales manager can sue the company for terminating her after she refused to fire a top saleswoman whom her boss considered unattractive. In 1999, Elyse Yanowitz filed suit against L'Oreal under the state's Fair Employment and Housing Act for retaliation because she received poor performance reviews, and was given new job requirements, after complaining about the alleged sex discrimination.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Ronald George said that allowing retaliation against employees who had a good faith belief that a discriminatory act took place "Would significantly discourage employees from opposing incidents of discrimination." the Court did not decide the issues of whether discrimination based on "Looks" was illegal under state law.

Yanowitz, who was a regional sales manager in charge of designer perfumes in several states, refused a male manager's request in 1997 to fire a top saleswoman because she was not "good-looking enough" and replace her with someone "hot." The following year, Yanowitz went on leave for stress, and was eventually replaced. The trial court dismissed her suit, but in 2003, a state appeals court reinstated it.

Two justices dissented from the ruling, noting that Yanowitz did not report the alleged discrimination to company officials. According to Justice Ming Chin, an employee who wants to receive whistleblower protection must "blow the whistle."