Compliance Unveiled: 10 Must-Know Tips for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act & Independent Contractor Rules
The Burr Broadcast: Key Differences Between PWFA and ADA
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Expands Title VII, EEOC’s Final PWFA Rule, AI Screening Tools - Employment Law This Week®
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 13: The Americans with Disabilities Act with Stefania Bondurant
The Burr Morning Show: Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 3: Top Labor & Employment Issues for 2024 with Jennie Cluverius, Cherie Blackburn, and Christy Rogers
Workplace Accommodation after COVID: Legal Update
Podcast: What Employers Should Know about the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act [More with McGlinchey, Ep. 62]
Employment Law Now VII-136 - Summer 2023 Wrap-Up Part 2
The Burr Broadcast Aug. 2023: Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
Supreme Court Miniseries: Religious Accommodation at Work
Employment Law Now VII-133 - Hot Summer Employment Law Developments
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Introduces Heightened Standard for Religious Accommodation, Rules Against Affirmative Action, Protects “Expressive” Services - Employment Law This Week®
Litigation Lessons for California Employers
DE Under 3: Diving into DEAMcon23 – Accommodations, DEIB, Disability & More
Constangy Webinar - Spring Cleaning: How to Keep your HR Practices Mess Free
Employment Law Now VII-130- An Interview With EEOC Commissioner (Vice Chair) Jocelyn Samuels
The Burr Morning Show April 2023 - The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
#WorkforceWednesday: Federal Focus on Mental Health, FTC and Noncompetes, Gig Work Risks for Hospitals - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law Now VI-116-Top 10 Employment Issues To Consider For The Summer Kick-Off
Religious discrimination cases have been all over the headlines in 2015. The most recognizable case involves Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses in protest of the legalization of...more
Until now, job application and interview questions that reveal applicants’ protected characteristics have been strongly discouraged. In an economy where dozens of people apply for a vacant job posting, knowing too much about...more
During the United States Supreme Court’s 2014-2015 term, the Court departed from the pro-business reputation it had developed in labor and employment cases. This term, employees prevailed more often than not, including in...more
Religious institutions commonly make payments to or receive payments directly or indirectly from governmental agencies for services rendered; e.g., day cares that benefit from public scholarships, hospitals that participate...more
Last week’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on religious discrimination, EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores Inc., may have the unintended effect of an increase in religious stereotyping in the workplace. The lawsuit...more
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court decided EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch, a Title VII case involving religious discrimination. While the case did not directly involve the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the...more
On Monday, June 1, 2015, the United States Supreme Court reversed a judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit which had granted Abercrombie & Fitch (“Abercrombie”) summary judgment in a religious...more
The Supreme Court recently held that job applicants may hold their potential employer liable for intentional discrimination under Title VII if the applicant can show that his or her need for an accommodation was a motivating...more
What if it looks like someone may need a religious accommodation, but the individual never asks? Does the company still have a duty to accommodate? In a much awaited opinion, the Supreme Court, in an 8-1 decision, determined...more
The United States Supreme Court issued an 8-1 ruling in favor of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc.The Court ruled that Abercrombie violated Title VII by refusing to...more
In a nutshell, the Supreme Court decision in EEOC v. Abercrombie means this: if an employment decision is motivated by religion – even if the employer does not actually know the religious need of the individual – then the...more
Arabic businesswoman in officeOn Monday, June 1, 2015, the United States Supreme Court held that an employer may not refuse to hire an applicant if the need for a religious accommodation was a motivating factor in the...more
Last year, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a controversial opinion absolving a clothing retailer from failing to hire a Muslim applicant for employment who did not tell the company that the headscarf worn at her job...more
On June 1, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the EEOC in the well-chronicled case involving a Muslim job applicant who the EEOC claimed was illegally denied employment because of her religion. In EEOC v. Abercrombie &...more
Use of a Dress Code Gone Bad - Employers catering to the public, or relying upon in-person customer contacts to promote their businesses, have frequently established employee "dress codes" to regularize the appearance of...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has issued its long awaited decision in the "Looks Policy" case, and it's not terribly unexpected, but is a little scary considering the potential far reaching effects going forward. ...more
On June 1, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held, in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., that an employer violates federal anti-discrimination law where an applicant’s need for a religious...more
On June 1, the Supreme Court issued an 8-1 decision in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., holding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits a prospective employer from refusing to hire an applicant in order to...more
On its face EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. dealt with an employer’s refusal to hire a Muslim woman who wore a headscarf in accordance with her religion, but the Supreme Court’s decision affects many more workplace...more
It’s the decision the employment bar has been waiting for: on June 1, 2015, in a 8-1 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the EEOC in the religious discrimination case of EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., which...more
In a decision that came as no major surprise to Supreme Court watchers, on June 1, 2015, the Court ruled 8-1 in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch that Abercrombie & Fitch violated the civil rights of a Muslim job applicant when it...more
In a ruling handed down yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in a religious discrimination case against the popular clothing retailer, Abercrombie & Fitch Stores,...more
In Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. (2015), seven justices of the U.S. Supreme Court found that Abercrombie & Fitch (A&F) violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by...more
On June 1, 2015, the United States Supreme Court issued a much anticipated ruling on the Title VII religious bias claim brought by a Muslim female applicant who wore a religiously mandated headscarf to her interview and was...more
In a closely-watched case arising from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held yesterday that an applicant or employee need not prove that an employer had...more