California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Sercarz v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal., B259677 (Cal. App. 2016):
inherently fact-specific," whether the employer's conduct qualifies as an adverse employment action depends on the "unique circumstances of the affected employee as well as the workplace context of the claim." (Id. at p. 1052.) "Minor or relatively trivial adverse actions or conduct by employers or fellow employees that, from an objective perspective, are reasonably likely to do no more than anger or upset an employee cannot properly be viewed as affecting the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment . . . ." (Id. at p. 1054.) Conduct does not constitute an adverse employment action simply because it is "'contrary to the employee's interests or not to the employee's liking . . . .'" (Malais v. Los Angeles City Fire Dept. (2007) 150 Cal.App.4th 350, 357, citation omitted.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.