Social Media + Employees = Hot Mess
#BigIdeas2020: NLRB’s Actions Impact Employers in 2020 - Employment Law This Week® - Trending News
Mike Daniels is a 300-pound mound of sound who played defensive tackle in the National Football League. After receiving more than a few personal foul penalties during his 10-year career, he explained that “the second guy...more
In Johnson v. Global Language Center, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court's decision to grant summary judgment in favor of an employer in a Title VII retaliation claim, where the “protected activity”...more
I am pumped! Are you? Last week, the U.S. Department of Labor issued a Field Assistance Bulletin to its staff on how to enforce the PUMP for Nursing Mothers Act, which was signed into law at the end of 2022 and is currently...more
Employers (hopefully) are aware that their employees are afforded certain rights under the National Labor Relations Act (the “NLRA” or “Act”), including the right to self-organization, to bargain collectively, and to engage...more
It is widely known that employers are prohibited from retaliating against employees for engaging in "protected activity." But what is "protected activity?" Unfortunately, the definition of "protected activity" varies widely...more
In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization the United States Supreme Court overturned years of precedent started by Roe v. Wade and conferred the right to regulate abortions to individual states. This marked change has...more
Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits retaliation against employees because they either oppose discriminatory actions (the "Opposition Clause") or because of their participation in an investigation, proceeding, or...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Managing employees engaged in potentially protected activity can be tricky when disciplinary and other normal employment actions might be misconstrued as unlawful retaliation. A recent decision from the...more
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects an employee’s conduct of complaining about Title VII violations. The Eleventh Circuit, however, has now provided the framework for when an employee’s otherwise protected conduct can...more
Piggybacking off my colleague Tim Reed’s recent post providing the background/plot and discussing employer liability issues in Amazon Studios’ The Boys, I am happy to continue expounding upon the various employment law issues...more
This month's key California employment law cases involve EEOC charges, disability discrimination, and meal breaks....more
Sanchez v. Brawley Elementary School District, 719 Fed. Appx. 723 (9th Cir. 2018) The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirms District Court’s ruling that a student’s conduct of kneeing her alleged harasser did not constitute...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The 8th Circuit recently held that while a request for a religious accommodation may qualify as a protected activity, it is not necessarily “oppositional” so as to give rise to an opposition-clause...more
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
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
Rather than conduct in breach of an inherent duty of loyalty to the employer, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a human resources representative engaged in protected activity under Title VII of the Civil...more
In late September, the Eleventh Circuit reversed a grant of summary judgment for Kia Motors Manufacturing of Georgia, Inc. on race and national origin retaliation claims brought by one of its HR managers. In the split...more
It has been two years since the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) published its enforcement guidance on retaliation and related issues in late August 2016. Since that time, the country elected a new...more
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits not only discrimination in employment on the basis of certain protected categories such as race, but also retaliation against an employee who opposes such discrimination....more
On April 6, 2018, the Texas Supreme Court issued a decision assessing what evidence is necessary to support an actionable same-sex sexual harassment claim. In an opinion totaling over 100 pages, the six-justice majority and...more
Employers beware: An employee does not have to use “magic words” to complain about discrimination for it to lay the basis for a retaliation claim. The Sixth Circuit made this point in a unanimous opinion in the case of Mumm...more
Dear Susan, I have to tell you about a situation that has been occurring between John and myself. But it’s not what you think! Well, maybe it is. I don’t know. I’m hoping that, as our supervisor, you can help me. To put it...more
Last month, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employee’s protected activity must be the “but for” cause of an adverse action to support a claim for retaliation under the False Claims Act (“FCA”). The Court...more
In the case of DiFiore v. CSL Behring, LLC, the Third Circuit ruled for the first time that the more demanding “but for” causation standard applies to retaliation claims under the False Claims Act (“FCA”), rejecting the lower...more
Continuing an alarming recent pattern of multi-million dollar jury awards, a Los Angeles jury panel recently awarded $17.4 million to a former employee of the Bureau of Sanitation. The employee claimed he had been retaliated...more