The Supreme Court said the ‘singular influence’ test was too restrictive in light of USERRA, which states that an employer may be held liable for discrimination if a person’s membership in the military is a ‘motivating factor’ in the employer’s action. By George Wood
Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a hospital worker could sue his former employer for the animosity of supervisors who did not make the ultimate decision to fire him.
The decision struck down a narrow version of the so-called cat’s paw theory of employer liability. But its practical effects for employers are unclear.
Full Story: http://www.workforce.com/archive/feature/legal/practical-effects-cats-paw-ruling-userra-case-still/index.php