In This Issue:

- Supreme Court Issues Two Key Title VII Rulings

- Ogletree Deakins Launches New Fall Seminar

- Are Your HIPAA Privacy Policies Up To Date

- OFCCP Clarifies Damages For Victims Of Bias

- The Other Labor Case Before The High Court

- Senate Confirms New Five-Member NLRB

- Court Revives Worker's Religious Accommodation Claim

- Objections To Matchmaking Do Not Constitute "Protected Activity"

- Excerpt from Supreme Court Issues Two Key Title VII Rulings:

On June 24, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States issued two highly anticipated decisions. In Vance v. Ball State University, the justices considered whether the “supervisor” liability rule established by Supreme Court precedent applies to harassment by employees whom the employer vests with the authority to direct and oversee a harassment victim’s daily work or whether the rule is limited to those who have the power to “hire, fire, demote, promote, transfer, or discipline” their victim. With Justice Alito writing for the majority in a 5-to-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that an employee is a “supervisor” for purposes of vicarious liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 only if he or she is empowered by the employer to take tangible employment actions against the victim. Vance v. Ball State University, No. 11- 556, Supreme Court of the United States (June 24, 2013).