The component is not available at this moment. Please contact the site administrator.
The U.S. Supreme Court created the possibility of unlimited awards in employment discrimination lawsuits in federal court, despite the $300,000 cap on damages in Title VII. The Court ruled that the cap does not apply to front pay — money an employee would have continued earning if they were not illegally terminated.1
In Pollard v. E.I. duPont Nemours & Co., two lower courts found that the longtime DuPont employee, Sharon Pollard, faced a severe hostile work environment because of sexual harassment. The courts ruled that DuPont supervisors knew about the discrimination but did not take adequate steps to stop it. Pollard was awarded back pay, lost benefits and attorneys’ fees and front pay to compensate for what she would have earned if she had not been subjected to the harassment and then fired by DuPont.
At trial, Pollard claimed that she was owed $800,000 in front pay. However, the lower courts limited her front pay award to $300,000, the cap set by Congress. Pollard appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. She argued that front pay should not be subject to the statutory cap on compensatory damages because it does not cover future monetary losses. Instead, front pay is a replacement for reinstating an employee in situations where reinstatement is inappropriate. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed.
1. Pollard v. E.I. duPont Nemours & Co., 532 U.S. 843 (2001)