News & Analysis as of

Olympia Construction to Pay $100,000 to Resolve EEOC Racial Harassment and Retaliation Lawsuit

Federal Agency Says Black Employees Were Racially Harassed by Project Superintendent And Fired for Complaining - SELMA, Ala. - Olympia Construction, Inc. will pay a total of $100,000 jointly to three former employees...more

Sparks Restaurant to Pay $56,000 and Provide Injunctive Relief in EEOC Retaliation Lawsuit

Menomonie, Wis., Restaurant Retaliated Against Employee for Complaints About Racially Offensive Drawings, Judge Ruled Following Jury's Findings - MADISON, Wis. - A federal district court has ruled that Sparx Restaurant...more

Sixth Circuit Holds General Contractor Can Be Liable in Discrimination Suit Brought by Sub-Contractor's Employees

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently reversed a district court's ruling granting summary judgment to a general contractor on the question of whether it could be held liable to its sub-contractor's employees as a joint...more

Did An Employer Inflate Its Worker’s Performance Deficiencies as a Pretext for Disability Bias? Mass. Court Says Maybe

On November 4, 2013, in Akerson v. Pritzker, No. 12-10240-PBS, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts rejected the race discrimination and Equal Pay Act claims brought by a former employee of the U.S....more

Poor Timing Alone Doesn't Equal Retaliation

In a recent lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals (whose rulings apply to all Missouri employers) upheld the trial court’s decision that a hospital didn’t discriminate...more

EEOC Sues Farmers Insurance for Race Bias in the Firing of Asian-American Claims Representatives

Insurance Giant Also Discharged Caucasian in Retaliation for Providing Testimony During the Discrimination Investigation, Federal Agency Charges - FRESNO, Calif. - Farmers Insurance Exchange violated federal law...more

EEOC Sues Dart Energy and J&R Well Services for Race/National Origin Discrimination, Retaliation

Workers Fired for Protesting Hostile Environment, Federal Agency Charged - DENVER - A Michigan-based energy company and its Wyoming subsidiary violated federal law against race and national origin harassment and...more

Labor Letter, September 2013: Employers Go "Two For Two" – Three Times Over: A Review Of The 2012-13 Supreme Court Term

Looking back at the recently-completed 2012-2013 Supreme Court term, employers should have reason to feel good about how things turned out. In fact, of the six major decisions that impact employers and can be categorized in...more

Labor Letter, September 2013: Supreme Court Tightens Standard In Retaliation Cases

As the U.S. Supreme Court ended its most recent term with a number of cases that will have broad societal implications, one employment law case decided by the Court seems to have taken somewhat of a back seat, despite the...more

EEOC Sues Carolina Mattress Guild for Racial Harassment and Retaliation

Thomasville Company Subjected Black Employees to Racial Abuse, Fired One of the Victims for Complaining, Federal Agency Charges - GREENSBORO, N.C. - Carolina Mattress Guild, Inc., a Thomasville, N.C.-based mattress...more

International Employment Law Review: August 2013 - Issue 4: Recent Employment Law Developments in the United States

U.S. Supreme Court Decisions - Court Limits Definition of “Supervisor” Under Federal Anti-Discrimination Law - In Vance v. Ball State University (June 24, 2013), in a 5-4 decision, a majority of the Supreme...more

Supreme Court Makes it Harder for Employees to Bring Suits Under Title VII

The Potential Implications for Educational Institutions - Last month, at the close of its October 2012 term, the Supreme Court issued two important rulings in Title VII employment discrimination cases that make it...more

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Three Decisions Favorable to Employers

By the end of this year’s term, the United States Supreme Court had issued three “employer-friendly” decisions. While the decisions do not dramatically alter the employment law landscape, employers will still welcome the...more

Two Supreme Court Rulings Improve Employer's Ability to Defend Against Harassment, Retaliation Claims

On June 24, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down two critical decisions regarding Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which improve an employer’s ability to defend against employee claims of harassment and retaliation. ...more

Fenwick Employment Brief - July 2013: U.S. Supreme Court Decides Several Employment and Employment-Related Cases

Employer strictly liable for supervisor’s harassment of employee only if supervisor has hire and fire authority over subordinates - In a favorable decision for employers, the U.S. Supreme Court in Vance v. Ball State...more

Contractor Pays $372,000 to Settle Retaliation Claims Asserted by Employees Hired Pursuant to Conciliation Agreement

The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) has just announced that Tufts Associated Health Plans Inc. (Tufts) will pay $372,000 to 12 minority employees....more

United States Supreme Court Issues Two Employer-Friendly Decisions With Far-Reaching Impact in Employee Harassment Cases

On June 24, 2013, the United States Supreme Court issued two employer-friendly opinions that substantially narrow potential liability for claims of supervisor misconduct and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act...more

Supreme Court Victory for Employers Facing Title VII Retaliation Claims

On June 24, 2013, the Supreme Court held in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, that the burden of proof for plaintiffs arguing retaliation in violation of Title VII is “but-for” causation, rather than...more

California Employment Law Notes - July 2013

Employee Must Prove That Illegal Retaliation Was The "But For" Cause Of Adverse Job Action Under Title VII - University of Tex. S.W. Med. Ctr. v. Nassar, 570 U.S. ___, 2013 WL 3155234 (2013) - The United States...more

Part 2 of 2: Supreme Court Rules That "Supervisors" Under Title VII Must Have Power to Take Tangible Employment Actions

On Monday, we blogged about the first of two recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions interpreting Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar. Today, we’ll...more

Recent United States Supreme Court Decisions Affecting Employers

Just recently, the United States Supreme Court issued two decisions affecting employers where employees allege unlawful retaliation or harassment under Title VII. In University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar,...more

Employees Must Prove Retaliation Was “But-For” Cause of Employment Action

Employers are well aware that poorly performing employees may lodge baseless retaliation claims as a smokescreen to interfere with legitimate discipline....more

Supreme Court Makes Defending Title VII Cases Easier For Employers; Decides To Review Noel Canning, Will Rule On NLRB Recess...

On June 24, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court issued opinions in two cases which are clear victories for employers. First, in Vance v. Ball State University, the Supreme Court held that “an employer may be vicariously liable for...more

Supreme Court Applies “But-For” Standard To Title VII Retaliation Claims

Also on June 24, 2013, the Supreme Court addressed the standard courts should apply to determine whether an employer violates Title VII's anti-retaliation provision. Because of a statutory amendment in 1991, courts apply a...more

For Employers, Nassar Ruling Should Ease Validations Of Employment Actions And Early Disposal Of Frivolous Lawsuits

The Supreme Court of the United States recently adopted a strict causation standard that will make it more difficult for employees seeking to prove retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964....more

60 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3