Title VII Retaliation Hiring & Firing

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a United States federal law enacted in 1964 and aimed at preventing discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion. Title VII... more +
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a United States federal law enacted in 1964 and aimed at preventing discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion. Title VII has been subsequently extended to discrimination on the basis of pregnancy and sexual stereotypes and to prohibit sexual harassment. Title VII applies to all employers with fifteen or more employees including private employers, state and local governments, and educational institutions.  less -
News & Analysis as of

Practical Tips for Dealing with an EEOC Charge

The first step for most disgruntled employees who believe they have been discriminated against is to file a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC, which is a prerequisite for filing a lawsuit under several discrimination...more

Food Lion Sued by EEOC for Religious Discrimination

Grocer Refused Accommodation for Jehovah's Witness's Worship Services, Federal Agency Charged - WINSTON SALEM, N.C. - Supermarket chain Food Lion, LLC violated federal law when it refused to provide a religious...more

Turner Machine Company Settles EEOC Retaliation Lawsuit for $80,000

Manufacturer Fired Engineer After He Filed a Discrimination Charge, Federal Agency Charged - NASHVILLE, Tenn. - Turner Machine Company will pay $80,000 and furnish other significant equitable relief to resolve a...more

EEOC Sues Bliss Cabaret for Race Discrimination and Retaliation

Clearwater Adult Club Fired Manager for Opposing Owner's Racially Discriminatory Practice, Federal Agency Charges - TAMPA, Fla - A Clearwater, Fla., adult entertainment club violated federal law by racially...more

50 for 50: Five Decades of the Most Important Discrimination Law Developments - Number 37: The Supreme Court Raises The Bar On...

Throughout this series, we have discussed how common retaliation claims have become and how challenging the courts have found it to define “causation” in the context of Title VII cases. Those two trends intersected recently...more

Four Hawaii Farms to Pay $2.4 Million to Thai Workers to Settle EEOC National Origin and Retaliation Employment Discrimination...

Additional Relief in the Form of Job Offers and Other Benefits Will Be Offered to Vulnerable Thai Laborers, Says Federal Agency - LOS ANGELES - Three years after filing suit against farm labor contractor Global...more

Bright Petroleum Inc. Sued by EEOC for Retaliation

Food Market Terminated Manager Who Filed Discrimination Charge, Federal Agency Charges - INDIANAPOLIS - Bright Petroleum Inc. d/b/a The Bright Market violated federal law by retaliating against a manager who filed and...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 Annapolis Internal Medicine for Pregnancy Discrimination and Retaliation

Medical Practice Fired Receptionist Who Complained About Pregnancy Discrimination, Federal Agency Charges - BALTIMORE - A large Annapolis, Md.-based internal medicine practice violated federal law when it fired a...more

Zoria Farms and Z Foods Sued by EEOC for Sexual Harassment and Retaliation

Dried Fruit Producer Fired a Class of Workers Who Protested the Widespread Abuse by Supervisors, Federal Agency Charges - FRESNO, Calif. - Z Foods, Inc., doing business as Zoria Farms, and its predecessor company,...more

Firing of Employee After His Angry Outburst During Mediation Did Not Constitute Retaliation

While the anti-retaliation provision of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not prohibit all employer action after an employee has filed a discrimination charge or lawsuit, it precludes employers from taking an...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

Supreme Court Narrows Scope Of Employer’s Liability For Title VII Claims Against Co-workers

On June 24, 2013 in the case Vance v. Ball State University, the Supreme Court defined the scope of supervisory status as it applies to harassing co-workers under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”). ...more

Supreme Court Ruling Defines "Supervisor" and Gives Clarity, Peace of Mind to Employers

Last month the U.S. Supreme Court adopted a bright-line standard for determining which employees qualify as supervisors in harassment lawsuits filed under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, thus resolving a split in the...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

Recent Supreme Court Cases Raise Bar for Plaintiffs Under Title VII

Two cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court at the end of its 2012-13 term, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar and Vance v. Ball State University, will significantly alter the landscape of employment...more

Employment Law -- Jul 03, 2013

Excerpt from Supreme Court Sides With Employers in Title VII Suits - Capping off a term of big decisions with employer-friendly results, the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in on two major employment issues in a pair of...more

Words that Make or Break a Client Relationship

In a week of landmark rulings on same-sex marriage and voting rights, it was easy to miss a significant employment law decision issues by the U.S. Supreme Court. That is doubly true in California, where plaintiffs prefer...more

Employers Prevail In Two U.S. Supreme Court Decisions

The U.S. Supreme Court issued two closely watched decisions Monday affecting Title VII cases....more

Two Major Supreme Court Wins for Employers

On Monday, June 24, 2013, the Supreme Court issued two 5-4 rulings in important cases affecting the employment world, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar and Vance v. Ball State University. By making it...more

Legal Alert: Supreme Court Sets Heightened Standard For Proving Retaliation Claims

On June 24, 2013, the United States Supreme Court heightened the burden of proof for employees bringing retaliation claims under Title VII by holding that employees have to prove that the employer's desire to retaliate was...more

Supreme Court Issues Important Affirmative Action And Employment Law Decisions

This week the Supreme Court issued three decisions that may significantly impact federal contractors and other employers: In Fisher v. University of Texas, No. 11-345 (U.S. June 24, 2013), the Supreme Court held that a...more

Too Little, Too Late: The Supreme Court Adopts But-For Causation for Title VII Retaliation Claims

On June 24, 2013, in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, 570 U.S. ___ (2013), the U.S. Supreme Court broke its long string of pronouncing expansive standards in the context of Title VII retaliation...more

Supreme Court Issues Two Important Title VII Opinions

Divided Court holds that a "supervisor" must be empowered to take tangible employment actions for vicarious liability under Title VII to apply and that Title VII retaliation claims are subject to a higher "but-for" causation...more

Supreme Court Issues Two Title VII Decisions Favorable For Employers

At our recent Labor and Employment Law Seminar, we highlighted a number of outstanding legal cases that have the potential to have a significant impact on employer liability. ...more

39 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2