What is the test for a plaintiff-employee challenging an adverse employment action as discriminatory or retaliatory?

Ordinarily, a plaintiff-employee challenging an adverse employment action as discriminatory or retaliatory need not do much to establish his qualification for the position he holds or seeks. As we have held in the related context of employment discrimination, "the qualification necessary to shift the burden to defendant for an explanation of the adverse job action is minimal; plaintiff must show only that he possesses the basic skills necessary for performance of the job." Slattery v. Swiss Reinsurance Am. Corp., 248 F.3d 87, 92 (2d Cir. 2001) (internal quotation marks and

Page 26

brackets omitted). Moreover, "the qualification prong must not be interpreted in such a way as to shift into the plaintiff's prima facie case an obligation to anticipate and disprove the employer's proffer of a legitimate, non-[retaliatory] basis for its decision." Gregory v. Daly, 243 F.3d 687, 696 (2d Cir. 2001). It is unusual for a plaintiff to fail to meet this standard.