Within minutes, he's escorted out.
Now take off the Capitol dome and put that scene in your workplace.
An employee complains about race discrimination. Maybe she objects to a racist meme circulating in the office group chat. Maybe she calls out a supervisor's "joke." She doesn't flip a desk. She doesn't torch the building or blast the company online. She just says, "This isn't okay."
Two days later, she's reassigned. Or written up. Or shown the door.
That's retaliation.
Under Title VII, employers cannot take an "adverse action" against someone because they opposed discrimination or participated in a complaint process. The opposition doesn't have to be polished. It doesn't have to be convenient. It just has to be a reasonable protest of unlawful conduct.
The standard for what qualifies as an "adverse action" is broader than many employers think.
It's not just termination. It's any action that might dissuade a reasonable worker from making or supporting a complaint of discrimination or harassment. Demotions. Pay cuts. Schedule changes. Undeserved discipline. Even subtle moves that materially alter job conditions.
The Supreme Court has made clear: if the employer's response would chill a reasonable person from speaking up, you've likely crossed the line.
Here's the mistake I see too often. Management focuses on whether the employee was disruptive. Annoying. Embarrassing. Public.
Wrong question.
The right question is this: would we have taken the same action if this employee had kept quiet?
If the honest answer is no, you're in retaliation territory.
Employees are allowed to protest discrimination. Even awkwardly. Even publicly. Even in ways that make leadership uncomfortable.
Employers, you don't get to punish the protest simply because you don't like the message. In the workplace, that escort to the door can turn into Exhibit A.