DE Under 3: Title VII Prohibits Discriminatory Job Transfers Even Without Significant Harm, U.S. Supreme Court Unanimously Ruled
On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States held that an employee challenging a job transfer in an unlawful employment discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 must show that the...more
The Supreme Court may soon clarify whether an employer’s decision to transfer an employee to a lateral job – with no change in pay or benefits – violates federal civil rights law if it’s done for discriminatory reasons....more
It’s hard to keep up with all the recent changes to labor and employment law, especially since the law always seems to evolve at a rapid pace. In order to ensure you stay on top of the latest changes and have an action plan...more
The Supreme Court just began a new term, and we’re watching several cases that will likely have a big impact on the workplace. Specifically, the Court will weigh in on whether someone can “test” violations of federal...more
Executive Summary: On June 3, 2022, an en banc panel (meaning all of the judges on the court participated) of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a landmark decision holding that Title VII does not require...more
Please join us for a panel discussion with industry-leading immigration lawyers, in-house experts and former government officials on the top issues that employers should focus on to attract and retain international executives...more
Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, employers are required to consider reassignment to an existing vacant position as a last ditch form of reasonable accommodation for an employee unable to return to their previous...more
If disabled employees are no longer able to perform the essential functions of their job even with reasonable accommodation, under the Americans with Disabilities Act the employer must consider transferring the workers to an...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Vaccinations have been widely debated over the past few years, leaving employers unclear about their obligations to accommodate employees whose religious beliefs conflict with them. Recently the U.S. Court...more
On January 29, 2019, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued a decision that addressed for the first time whether an employer’s failure to grant an employee’s lateral transfer request could support an employment...more
The federal courts in D.C. have long held that denial of a lateral transfer does not violate Title VII for the reason that, unlike where a promotion is denied, there is no adverse employment action when an employee is denied...more
It seems that the Cour de Cassation (France’s equivalent to the Supreme Court of the United States) occasionally throws employers a bone when determining their rights to make management decisions regarding their workforces....more
On June 22, 2016, Judge Daniels of the Southern District of New York dismissed SOX and Dodd-Frank whistleblower claims, ruling that Plaintiff’s alleged internal complaints did not constitute protected activity, as they did...more
On August 17, 2015, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) released a policy memorandum aiming to clarify the standard required for L-1B specialized knowledge visas. The memorandum notably begins by reminding...more
In EEOC v. Autozone, Inc., Case No. 14-CV-5579 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 4, 2015), Judge Amy St. Eve of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant and against the...more
A recent court decision allows employees who request a lateral transfer to later change their minds and sue for discrimination based on the very transfer they sought. So an employer’s claim that it merely gave the employee...more