Work this Way: An Employment Law Video Podcast | Episode 49: Building Culture by Investing in People with Silvia King of Southern First Bank
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 48: Opportunities & Risks with Artificial Intelligence in HR with Chingwei Shieh of GE Power
Law Firm ERGs Under Scrutiny: Navigating Compliance, Risk, and Culture - On Record PR
Amend (Don’t End) DEI: What SHRM’s BEAM Framework Means for Law Firms - On Record PR
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 47: Coaching Leaders & Building Culture with Robyn Knox of The HR Business Connect
How Modern Workplaces Navigate Generational Shifts: One-on-One with Jeff Landes
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 46: The 2025 Greenville SHRM Conference with Tyler Clark and Brittany Goforth of GSHRM
100 Days In: What Employers Need to Know - Employment Law This Week® - #WorkforceWednesday®
Non-Competes Eased, Anti-DEI Rule Blocked, Contractor Rule in Limbo - Employment Law This Week® - #WorkforceWednesday®
Clocking in with PilieroMazza: Latest Developments on DEI Executive Order and Action Items before April 21 Deadline
2 Gurus Talk Compliance: Episode 49 - The Depression Episode
072: Prepare For Trump Executive Orders To Hit Your Law Firm
#WorkforceWednesday®: EEOC/DOJ Joint DEI Guidance, EEOC Letters to Law Firms, OFCCP Retroactive DEI Enforcement - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday®: Federal Contractors Alert - DEI Restrictions Reinstated by Appeals Court - Employment Law This Week®
State AG Pulse | DEI in the Federal and State Spotlight
ESG Essentials: What You Need To Know Now - Episode 18 - The Reshaping of ESG & DEI
Everything Compliance: Episode 151, The What is Illegal DEI Edition
#WorkforceWednesday®: Should Employers Shift Workforce Data Collection Under President Trump? - Employment Law This Week®
When DE&I Are Under Attack: On Record PR
Everything Compliance, Shout Outs and Rants: Episode 151, The What is Illegal DEI Edition
On June 5, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services that courts cannot apply a heightened evidentiary standard to majority-group plaintiffs when deciding discrimination claims. The...more
On June 5, 2025, in a 9-0 opinion, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services that members of a “majority group” do not have to satisfy a heightened evidentiary standard to prevail on a...more
On May 15, 2025, a federal district court in Texas vacated sections of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC or the “Commission”) 2024 Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace (the “2024 Enforcement...more
On 5 June 2025, the Supreme Court ruled in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services that, in order to establish a Title VII claim, a plaintiff who is a member of a “majority group” is not required to show “background...more
The 2019 film “Late Night,” written by and starring Mindy Kaling, tells the story of a late-night talk show host, Katherine Newbury, played by Emma Thompson, whose all-male, all-white writing staff scrambles to add a female...more
A recent Supreme Court decision clarified that discrimination claims brought by members of majority groups in so-called “reverse discrimination” cases cannot be subject to a heightened evidentiary burden. In Ames v. Ohio...more
A recent Supreme Court decision is reshaping how employers must think about workplace discrimination—confirming that all employees, majority or minority, are held to the same legal standard under Title VII. This shift could...more
Can members of a majority group be subject to a heightened pleading standard for their Title VII discrimination claims? The United States Supreme Court answered this question with a unanimous “no” in Ames v. Ohio Department...more
When I think of employment discrimination, I generally think of someone in a traditional majority group (e.g., white or male) firing someone in a minority group (e.g., African American or female) because of sex or race. But...more
Key Takeaways: - The Supreme Court held that Title VII does not permit courts to impose a heightened evidentiary standard on majority-group plaintiffs alleging disparate treatment. - Some lower courts have required...more
Earlier this month, in a long-awaited ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with a straight white woman who claimed to have lost out on two positions to LGBT candidates and was also demoted in favor of them. ...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of petitioner, Marlean Ames, a heterosexual woman, who commenced a reverse discrimination case against her former employer, the Ohio Department of Youth...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that plaintiffs bringing discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) cannot be required to satisfy a heightened evidentiary...more
In Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, No. 23-1039 (S. Ct. June 5, 2025), the US Supreme Court unanimously dispelled the concept of “reverse” discrimination, making clear that discrimination on the basis of a protected...more
The U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark, unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, 605 U.S. ___ (2025) on June 5, 2025, fundamentally altering the landscape for “reverse discrimination” claims under...more
The United States Supreme Court has held that the evidentiary standards for “reverse discrimination” claims under federal employment law must be the same as those set for claims brought by members of minority groups....more
As widely expected, the Supreme Court’s June 5, 2025 decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services confirmed that a plaintiff alleging employment discrimination under Title VII cannot be held to a different,...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, rejecting the “background circumstances” requirement multiple circuit courts of appeals have applied to Title...more
On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, striking down the “background circumstances” requirement in so-called “reverse discrimination” cases. The Court held...more
Workplace diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs face more scrutiny than ever in light of President Trump’s recent executive orders regarding DEI policies and programs across the public and private sectors, recent...more
After months of uncertainty over what aspect of employer DEI (or diversity, equity and inclusion) policies could be discriminatory, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ)...more
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has set its sights on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, signaling heightened enforcement risks for employers. In a memorandum, Attorney General Pam Bondi directed the DOJ to...more
In the first days of his presidency, President Donald J. Trump made significant changes to the makeup and priorities of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). On the second day of his administration, President...more
2024 was yet another active year in the labor and employment landscape. While 2025 and the new administration could bring any number of changes to workplace laws and enforcement, the timing and extent of such changes is...more
On Oct. 4, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to hear Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services –a reverse discrimination case from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The question before the Supreme...more