Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, DOL NEWS—VETS emphasizes that after amendment, USERRA retaliation protections extend beyond adverse employment actions, (Sep 9, 2026)

By Brandi O. Brown, J.D.

It now more closely aligns with Title VII interpretations of retaliatory action.

In an opinion letter issued this week, the U.S. Department of Labor's Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS) has announced its conclusion that recent amendments to the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) expand retaliation protections for service members and others who engage in activity protected by the law, extending coverage beyond traditional workplace employment actions.

In VETS-Opinion-Letter-9-8-2026, issued on September 8, VETS said the addition of the phrase "other retaliatory action" to USERRA in 2025 by the Senator Elizabeth Dole 21st Century Veterans Healthcare and Benefits Improvement Act broadens the types of employer conduct that may be challenged as retaliation and actionable retaliation is no longer limited to adverse employment actions affecting the terms and conditions of employment.

USERRA protects employment and reemployment rights for members of the uniformed services and also prohibits discrimination and retaliation against individuals who engage in protected activities under that statute, such as enforcing USERRA rights, testifying or making statements in USERRA proceedings, assisting in investigations, and exercising rights provided under the law. The statute's anti-retaliation protections apply regardless of whether the individual personally served in the uniformed services.

“Other retaliatory action” too. On January 2, 2025, the Dole Act added "other retaliatory action" to the statute's anti-retaliation provision. Before that amendment, employers were prohibited from discriminating or taking an adverse employment action against a person because they engaged in protected activity. Following the amendment, employers now are also barred from taking “other retaliatory action” against individuals who engage in protected conduct, in addition to “adverse employment action.”

What other actions included? The opinion letter was issued in response to inquiries received by VETS from service members and volunteers seeking guidance on what types of conduct may qualify as an "other retaliatory action" under the amended statute. The agency said the letter is intended to explain its interpretation of the new language and provide examples of conduct that may fall within the prohibition.

Central to the agency's analysis is the relationship between USERRA's amended anti-retaliation provision and retaliation standards developed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. VETS noted that the U.S. Supreme Court in Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White held that Title VII retaliation claims are not confined to actions affecting the terms and conditions of employment and could include actions that might dissuade a reasonable worker from making or supporting a discrimination complaint.

Title VII principles. The agency noted that, prior to the Dole Act, some courts had interpreted USERRA more narrowly than Title VII because the statute referred only to adverse employment actions. With Congress's addition of the phrase "other retaliatory action," however, VETS said the principles that govern Title VII retaliation claims now apply equally to retaliation claims brought under USERRA. In the agency's view, the amendment signals that retaliation under USERRA can encompass a broader range of conduct than actions directly tied to employment status, pay, or working conditions.

VETS specifically noted that federal courts have interpreted Title VII to emphasize that retaliation protections may reach conduct that is not strictly workplace- or employment-related. “This affords employees ‘protection from a wider range of retaliatory conduct’ than would be available under previous standards,” it noted.

Examples. To illustrate this concept, the agency identified several examples that courts have treated as retaliatory actions in other contexts, such as changes to work schedules, transfers to less desirable positions, increased scrutiny of an employee, exclusion from professional opportunities, threats or coercion, and even the filing of false criminal charges. VETS noted, however, that the Supreme Court has emphasized that context remains important when evaluating a particular claim and that conduct that may appear insignificant in one setting could be actionable in another.

With the enactment of the Dole Act, VETS concluded, “other retaliatory actions” are now actionable in USERRA retaliation claims. The action in question need not be an “employment action” and, instead, would encompass any retaliatory action “that would be sufficient to dissuade a reasonable employee from, under USERRA, enforcing a protection, testifying in a proceeding, assisting in an investigation, or exercising a right.”

News: AgencyNews USERRAVeterans Retaliation CoverageLiability