News & Analysis as of

Hiring & Firing › Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) › Protected Activity

Hiring & Firing refers to the process of recruiting, interviewing and offering employment and the process of evaluating performance and dismissing employees. Hiring & Firing is a highly regulated area and... more +
Hiring & Firing refers to the process of recruiting, interviewing and offering employment and the process of evaluating performance and dismissing employees. Hiring & Firing is a highly regulated area and can create tremendous liability for employers who fail to properly adhere to acceptable employment practices. Some of the potential pitfalls in this area stem from discriminatory hiring practices, improper performance evaluations, and retaliatory firings.  less -
Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Cases: June 2019

Payne & Fears on

This month's key California employment law cases involve EEOC charges, disability discrimination, and meal breaks....more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

For Employers in the #MeToo Era: It’s Not the Harassment Claim, It’s the Retaliation Claim that Gets You

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

The era of #MeToo has caused employers to hyper-focus on harassment claims. They have fine-tuned their policies, investigated claims more carefully, and acted swiftly and sometimes even in a draconian fashion upon finding any...more

Polsinelli

No, Stealing Personnel Files Is Not Protected Activity (But the analysis doesn’t end there)

Polsinelli on

On November 15, 2018, the United States Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the Middle District of North Carolina in the case of Netter v. Barnes, et al, upholding dismissal of Netter’s case because her...more

Fisher Phillips

Appeals Court Rejects Retaliation Claim Based On Religious Accommodation Request

Fisher Phillips on

In a case of first impression, a federal appeals court just found that an applicant’s request for a religious accommodation did not constitute protected activity under Title VII for the purpose of establishing a retaliation...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

EEOC Argues that Sexual Orientation Discrimination by a Heterosexual Person can Constitute a Protected Activity

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In her appeal to the Fifth Circuit, Plaintiff Bonnie O’Daniel argues that the trial court wrongly concluded that it was unreasonable for O’Daniel to believe that a complaint about discrimination based on sexual orientation...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

The More You Know... Or Others Think You Know: Fifth Circuit Finds Decision-maker Had Knowledge to Constitute Retaliation

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

The Fifth Circuit has issued another opinion in the continuing saga of Jackson State University and its past athletic director, Dr. Vivian Fuller—this one about retaliation against a witness. To refresh everyone’s memory: A...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

The NLRB/EEOC Landmine – When Does Offensive Speech Amount to Protected Activity?

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

Employers need to be on the lookout for instances of offensive employee speech, which may put them between a rock and a hard place as they navigate potential claims under either anti-discrimination laws or federal labor laws....more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Court Rules Request for Religious Accommodation Is Not “Protected Activity” for Title VII Retaliation

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: A recent decision by a federal district court in Minnesota held that a religious accommodation request is not “protected activity” under Title VII. In defending retaliation litigation, employers should...more

Sherman & Howard L.L.C.

Grudges Are Forever

Sherman & Howard L.L.C. on

Even a gap of five years between protected conduct and an adverse action isn’t enough to show the two are not connected. In Baines v. Walgreen Co., No. 16-3335 (7th Cir. July 12, 2017), the plaintiff had worked for the...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Court Allows EEOC’s Discrimination Suit Over Religious Garb To Proceed To Jury

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In an order recently issued in EEOC v Jetstream Ground Services, Inc., Case No. 13-CV-02340 (D. Colo. Sept. 29, 2015), Judge Christine Arguello of the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado ruled that the EEOC had...more

10 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide