News & Analysis as of

Reasonable Accommodation Title VII Disparate Treatment

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

Federal Court Decision Highlights Complexities of Laws Applicable to Pregnant Employees

As the laws governing the treatment of pregnant employees and new mothers continues to evolve, one recent decision from the United States District Court for the Northern District Alabama highlights the complexities that arise...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

California Employment Law Notes - July 2015

Employee's Inability To Work For A Particular Supervisor Does Not Constitute A "Disability" - Higgins-Williams v. Sutter Med. Found., 237 Cal. App. 4th 78 (2015) - Michaelin Higgins-Williams worked as a clinical...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Religious Institutions: June 2015

Holland & Knight LLP on

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

Holland & Knight LLP

Supreme Court Ruling Highlights Risks for Employers at Interview - Plaintiff Can Prove Title VII Claim by Showing That Employer...

Holland & Knight LLP on

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

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

Employment Law Reporter – June 2015

Abercrombie & Fitch’s “Look Policy” Needs A Makeover After The Supreme Court Looked At It - The Abercrombie & Fitch clothing company is famous for their scantily clad models with six-packs and very little actual clothing...more

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

Supreme Court Abercrombie & Fitch Ruling: It’s the Motive that Matters

As most lawyers and HR professionals know, on June 1, 2015, Justice Antonin Scalia authored a concise opinion, overturning the Tenth Circuit and holding that Abercrombie & Fitch had intentionally discriminated against...more

Williams Mullen

Supreme Court Sides with EEOC in Longstanding Hijab Dispute with National Clothing Retailer

Williams Mullen on

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

Jackson Walker

Accommodating Religious Practices in the Workplace: Time to Check Those Dress Codes

Jackson Walker on

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

McAfee & Taft

SCOTUS rules against Abercrombie & Fitch in Tulsa religious discrimination case

McAfee & Taft on

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and against Abercrombie & Fitch Stores Inc. in a religious discrimination lawsuit involving a Muslim job applicant at its Tulsa,...more

Bond Schoeneck & King PLLC

The Supreme Court’s Decision in EEOC v. Abercrombie: What Can Employers Do to Reduce the Risk of Religious Discrimination Claims...

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

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Dress Codes, Religion and the Workplace – More Than Meets the Eye

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

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Wait, I Thought We Couldn’t Ask About Religion in Hiring? The Impact of the Supreme Court’s Ruling in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

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

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Religious Discrimination Suit Over Muslim Job Applicant’s Hijab; U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Abercrombie & Fitch

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

Robinson & Cole LLP

What Does A Sexy, Trendy Retail Chain Have In Common With Religious Land Use? Read About The Supreme Court’s Decision In The...

Robinson & Cole LLP on

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

Miller Canfield

Supreme Court Clarifies Protections for Religion in Hiring

Miller Canfield on

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

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

U.S. Supreme Court Holds Failure to Accommodate Religion May Be Evidence of Intentional Discrimination

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court held in favor of the EEOC in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Store Stores, Inc. The EEOC claimed that Abercrombie violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) by refusing to...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Supreme Court Rules Employer’s Motive (Not Knowledge) Decides Disparate-Treatment Claims

On June 1, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States decided whether an employer’s obligations under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are triggered only when an applicant has informed the employer of his or her...more

Poyner Spruill LLP

Supreme Court Issues Decision Regarding Accommodation of Pregnant Employees

Poyner Spruill LLP on

On March 25, 2015, the United States Supreme Court issued an important decision in the case of Young v. UPS, involving a claim of failure to accommodate in violation of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA). The PDA, which...more

Bond Schoeneck & King PLLC

Labor and Employment: The Supreme Court Addresses Pregnancy Accommodations Under Title VII (4/15)

On March 25, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much anticipated decision in Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., which centered on whether UPS unlawfully discriminated against a pregnant employee by denying her a light-duty...more

Orrick - Employment Law and Litigation

Splitting the Baby: SCOTUS Ruling in Pregnancy Discrimination Suit Calls For Review of Pregnancy Accommodations

On March 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., holding that the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) requires courts to consider the extent to which an employer’s policy...more

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

U.S. Supreme Court Announces New Standard for Pregnancy Discrimination Claims

Last Wednesday the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc. (UPS), which involves a claim of pregnancy discrimination under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA)....more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

Employment Law Advice You Should Never Follow

This is terrible advice on so many levels. First, an employee who doesn’t have even the relatively minimal income provided by unemployment is going to be that much more likely to sue you — as a matter of financial survival,...more

22 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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide