#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Decision on LGBTQ Employees, EEOC on Older Workers Returning to Work - Employment Law This Week®
I-12: Update on the DOL's New OT Rules, and Part 2 of My Interview with Former EEOC General Counsel David Lopez
Employee Who Wanted To Donate/Freeze Her Eggs Was Not Protected By Pregnancy Statute - Paleny v. Fireplace Products U.S., Inc., 103 Cal. App. 5th 199 (2024) - Erika Paleny alleged harassment, discrimination and...more
Forty years ago, the US Supreme Court’s decision in Chevron USA, Inc. v. National Resources Defense Council, 46 US 837 (1984), upended administrative law practice. In brief, that case, for which the “Chevron doctrine” is...more
The U.S. Supreme Court on February 8, 2024, held in a unanimous decision that whistleblowers do not need to show retaliatory intent in order to establish protection under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”), 18 U.S.C....more
The Supreme Court is set to shake up the workplace world by taking away a great deal of power from federal agencies – including the regulators who oversee many of the nation’s labor and employment laws. That’s according to...more
In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision invalidating affirmative action at America’s colleges and universities, a flurry of lawsuits challenging private employers’ diversity and inclusion programs have been filed around...more
On October 2, 2023, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) published long-anticipated proposed guidance related to workplace harassment. If adopted by the EEOC, the enforcement guidance would supersede four...more
Supreme Court Decides Freedom of Speech Trumps Public Accommodations Law In 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, No. 21-476 (June 30, 2023), the U.S. Supreme Court reversed 6-3 the lower courts' denial of the injunction the plaintiff...more
As plan sponsors and fiduciaries cope with the increased volume of class action Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) lawsuits, some have considered the prospects of reducing their exposure through arbitration...more
This Littler Lightbulb highlights some of the more significant employment and labor law developments at the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeal over the last month....more
A common trope of a 1930’s film is the callous boss handing a wizened older Wallace Barry looking man a gold watch and showing him the door as a young up-and-comer sits himself down at his desk. Is mandatory retirement legal...more
Many employers maintain formal or informal severance policies or practices that they use sporadically. Other employers may implement a severance program for a limited period of time to reduce the number of employees overall...more
Legal precedent, including language from the U.S. Supreme Court, requires federal courts to take a broad view of the “but-for” causation standard for determining unlawful age discrimination in the workplace, Equal Employment...more
Sixth Circuit Will Not Expand Landmark Title VII Case of Bostock v Clayton County to ADEA Claims - Employers in the Sixth Circuit Gain Predictability in the Test for Determining Claims Under the ADEA... ...more
The Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Bostock v. Clayton County announced that employees are protected from discrimination based on their LGBTQ status. In reaching its historic holding, the Bostock Court engaged in an...more
Supreme Court decisions are often the most challenging pieces of legal guidance to understand. They are rarely straightforward and usually contain so much analysis that it becomes hard to get to the bottom of what was...more
Educational institutions across the nation are grappling with decisions on returning teachers, staff and administrators to work for the academic year 2020-2021 in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. Each institution must...more
It’s #WorkforceWednesday. This week, we saw a landmark employment law decision and received clarifications on return-to-work issues involving older workers. Here’s the top news: SCOTUS Rules Title VII Protects LGBTQ...more
Last week, the US Supreme Court made it easier for a federal worker to establish a claim for age bias. This decision does not impact private employers, because it relied on the specific language of the federal sector...more
In an 8-to-1 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court just made it easier for federal employees and applicants to prove age discrimination by ruling that courts should not apply a heightened causation standard in such cases. By...more
On April 6, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Babb v. Wilkie, holding that the federal-sector provision of the Age Discrimination and Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. §633a(a), does not require proof that age...more
On April 6, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court held that federal-sector plaintiffs in age discrimination cases brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) need not show that negative consideration of age is a...more
Babb v. Wilkie, No. 18-882: Petitioner Norris Babb, a clinical pharmacist at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, brought an age discrimination suit against the Secretary of Veterans Affairs (“VA”). The federal-sector...more
What does an age discrimination plaintiff have to prove to succeed? Federal employees may have an easier path for proving an age discrimination claim, if we are reading the tea leaves correctly on the Supreme Court’s oral...more
The 2019-2020 U.S. Supreme Court term could have a significant impact on the employment law area, with three major issues already on the docket for the justices to consider....more
Taking a three-year look back at the Supreme Court’s workplace law decisions gives you the sense that the exciting cases only come down every other year. In the ho-hum term that ended in 2017, the Court handled relatively...more