News & Analysis as of

What 2013 Gifts will Employers be Enjoying well into 2014?

The holidays have come and gone. I hope everyone enjoyed them, and I hope everyone received the gifts and presents they asked for. I come from a big family—three siblings, 14 aunts and uncles, and nearly twenty cousins....more

New Definition Of “Supervisor” For Purposes Of Title VII

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a ruling settling a split in the circuit courts over the definition of “supervisor” for purposes of employer liability for harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, in Vance...more

Labor & Employment: Clarifying Employer Liability for Supervisors Under Title VII: Vance v. Ball State University

It is commonly known that discrimination in employment based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin is illegal, and that employers should take care to reinforce these principles in the workplace. But knowledge...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

August 2013: Appellate Update

U.S. Supreme Court Concludes October 2012 Term. The U.S. Supreme Court concluded its October 2012 Term in June with a number of highly publicized cases on issues like race and gay marriage, but equally notable are the Term’s...more

Butler Snow Workplace - Vol. 2013 No. 7

In This Issue: - A New Supreme Court Decision Helps Employers in Harassment Cases - Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Says Nursing Home RNs Are Supervisors - A New Heightened Standard For Title VII...more

A New Supreme Court Decision Helps Employers in Harassment Cases

The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Vance v. Ball State just made it easier for employers to defend against some Title VII harassment lawsuits. In a 5-4 decision, the Court rejected the harassment claims brought by...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

The Employment Law Authority - July/August 2013

In This Issue: - Supreme Court Issues Two Key Title VII Rulings - Ogletree Deakins Launches New Fall Seminar - Are Your HIPAA Privacy Policies Up To Date - OFCCP Clarifies Damages For Victims Of Bias - The...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

Supreme Court Clarifies When an Employee is a Supervisor Under Title VII

In a 5-4 decision that represents a major victory for employers, the U.S. Supreme Court held that an employee must have the power to take tangible employment actions against another worker in order to be considered a...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

Employment Flash - July 2013

In This Issue: - U.S. Supreme Court Issues Two Important Decisions Under Title VII - Supreme Court Holds Lone Plaintiff’s FLSA Collective Action Is Moot When Claims Are Resolved Before Certification -...more

Recent Pro-Employer Opinions by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court issued two employment law opinions at the end of June that are generally viewed as beneficial to employers....more

Raising the Bar on Employer Liability for Harassment and Retaliation

On June 24, the Supreme Court issued two new opinions in favor of employers, both five-to-four decisions that narrowly construe the scope of Title VII’s retaliation and employer liability rules and significantly raise the bar...more

A Review Of The Supreme Court’s 2012-2013 Term

As the United States Supreme Court’s 2012-2013 term drew to a close at the end of June, commentators observed a continuing gradual but perceptible shift to the right by the Court. The Roberts Court is generally viewed as...more

Fenwick Employment Brief - July 2013

In a favorable decision for employers, the U.S. Supreme Court in Vance v. Ball State University ruled that employers are strictly liable for harassment by a supervisor where the supervisor is empowered to take tangible...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

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 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

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

Supreme Court Defines “Supervisor” For Title VII

The Supreme Court staked out a definition for "supervisor" in the context of Title VII. Vance v. Ball State Univ., No. 11-556 (June 24, 2013). Whether a person is a "supervisor" determines whether the employer can be held...more

66 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3