In This Issue:

- Supreme Court Revives Pregnant UPS Worker's Suit

- Spouses of H-1B Visa Holders Applying for Residency Eligible for Work Permits

- Turning Metrics Into Money: An Interview With Solange Charas, Ph.D.

- SEC Investigating Employment Contracts That Restrict Whistleblowing

- Single "Hitler" Comment Is Insufficient to Support Title VII Retaliation Claim

- Worker Fail to Show Age Was "But-For" Cause of His Discharge

- Excerpt from Supreme Court Revives Pregnant UPS Worker's Suit:

On March 25, 2015, in a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States settled a controversy surrounding an employer’s policy that provided light-duty work for three specific groups of employees, but not pregnant workers. The case was brought by an employee who alleged that the policy discriminated against pregnant workers. The Court held that an individual pregnant worker may show disparate treatment via indirect evidence. According to the majority, the employee can establish pretext (or unlawful motive on the part of the employer) by showing that the policy placed a “significant burden” on female workers, and that the policy was “not sufficiently strong” to justify that burden. Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., No. 12–1226, Supreme Court of the United States (March 25, 2015).