Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corp. v. U.S. Department of Labor Administrative Review Board, No. 18-2888 (8th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
The Eighth Circuit granted a petition for review of the ARB's final decision ruling that CP violated the whistleblower retaliation provisions of the Federal Railroad Safety Act (FRSA) when it suspended a locomotive engineer for his untimely reporting of a "work-related personal injury" or a "hazardous safety or security condition." The court agreed with CP's argument that the ARB's analysis of the contributing factor element of the employee's prima facie case used a legal causation standard contrary to controlling Eighth Circuit precedents.
The court held that the ARB's reasoning was both contrary to the court's governing precedents and fatally flawed; the FRSA prohibits a rail carrier from discriminating against an employee for engaging in protected activity; the employee does not have to conclusively prove retaliatory motive but must show more than temporal proximity between the protected activity and the adverse action; and the court expressly rejected the contention that, when an employer learns about an employee's conduct warranting discipline in a protected injury report, the report and the discipline are "inextricably intertwined" and this factual connection is "sufficient to establish the contributing-factor element of his prima facie case." Because the ARB did not attempt to apply the appropriate Eighth Circuit legal standard, the court remanded to the ARB with instructions.
Court Description: [Loken, Author, with Shepherd and Stras, Circuit Judges] Petition for Review - Order of the Department of Labor. The Administrative Review Board's decision in this matter is both contrary to established Eighth Circuit precedent and fatally flawed; with respect to Federal Railroad Safety Act claims this court has held that the contributing factor that an employee must prove is intentional retaliation prompted by the employee engaging in protected activity; the court has expressly rejected the contention that when an employer learns about an employee's conduct warranting discipline in a protected injury report, the report and the discipline are inextricably intertwined and this factual connection is sufficient to establish the contributing-factor element of a prima facie case; the employer's petition for review is granted and the matter is remanded to the Review Board with instructions to apply the correct legal standard to the existing administrative record.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.