What's the Tea in L&E? Why You Need Policies for Temps and Other Contractors
Fintech Focus Podcast | Managing a Workforce in a Regulated Environment
(Podcast) California Employment News: Understanding ADA/FEHA Requirements and the Interactive Process
California Employment News: Understanding ADA/FEHA Requirements and the Interactive Process
Exploring Employment Law Across Borders: Italy vs. US With White Lotus — Hiring to Firing Podcast
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 31: Trade Secrets and Protecting Confidential Information with Jennie Cluverius of Maynard Nexsen
#WorkforceWednesday®: Staples Sued Over MA’s Lie Detector Notice, NJ’s Gender-Neutral Dress Code, 2024 Voting Leave Policies - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law Now VIII-150 - The FTC Noncompete Rule is Dead: What Now?
Employment Law Now VIII-149 - Part 2 of 2: The Final Interview With EEOC Commissioner Keith Sonderling
(Podcast) California Employment News: Court Ruling Halts FTC’s Non-Compete Ban – Implications for Employers
#WorkforceWednesday®: What the FTC Non-Compete Ban Block Means for Employers - Employment Law This Week®
What's the Tea in L&E? Are "Furries" Protected in the Workplace?
Employment Law Now VIII-148- Part 1 of 2: The Final Interview With EEOC Commissioner Keith Sonderling
Back to School: 3 Essential Employee Trainings
The Chartwell Chronicles: New Jersey Attorney Fees
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 30: Plaintiff Legal Trends with Paul Porter of Cromer, Babb & Porter
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Employment Law Edition: The Latest on Non-Competes and Independent Contractors
The Burr Broadcast: OSHA Clarifies Work-Relatedness of Employee Injuries While Traveling
Labor Law Insider - Collective Bargaining: Ins and Outs, Nuts and Bolts, Part II
The Chartwell Chronicles: Employment Law Updates
Earlier this year in its Abercrombie decision, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that an employee suing for religious discrimination did not have to demonstrate actual knowledge of an employee’s religious practices to trigger...more
California Sick Leave Law Gets Updates - Why it matters: California's Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act just took effect on July 1 but Governor Jerry Brown has already signed into law tweaks to the statute....more
In a marked departure from the overwhelming success employers experienced before the Supreme Court in recent years, the less successful recently wrapped 2014-2015 term could be an indication that the judicial tides may be...more
Last week, the world mourned Cecil the Lion, and all eyes were on the Minnesota dentist who killed him. The scrutiny of the dentist unearthed, among other things, a sexual harassment complaint lodged against him by a former...more
Samantha Elauf, a practicing Muslim, wore a headscarf when she interviewed for a job with Abercrombie & Fitch. Although the headscarf was not discussed during the interview, the store allegedly decided not to offer Elauf a...more
Your author joined the ranks of the bearded in January after six years of daily shaving for the Air Force, skillfully concealing his newfound hirsuteness (look it up) amid the current popularity in facial hair (see: Special...more
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
Employer’s Motive, Not Confirmed Knowledge Of Accommodation Need, Is Basis Of Religious Accommodation Violation - Federal anti-discrimination laws (“Title VII”) prohibit an employer from refusing to hire a candidate to...more
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) opened its doors on July 2, 1965, exactly one year after President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII of that act (“Title VII”) prohibits...more
On June 1, 2015, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores in which it held that a job applicant can experience religious discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act...more
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court decided EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch, a Title VII case involving religious discrimination. While the case did not directly involve the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the...more
Actual Knowledge by Employer Not Necessary for Title VII Religious Discrimination Claim, U.S. Supreme Court Rules - Why it matters: In a closely watched case, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with a teenage applicant to...more
The Supreme Court recently held that job applicants may hold their potential employer liable for intentional discrimination under Title VII if the applicant can show that his or her need for an accommodation was a motivating...more
On June 1, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court, in an 8-1 decision, ruled in favor of a 17-year-old practicing Muslim, Samantha Elauf, who applied for a job at retailer Abercrombie & Fitch, but was denied employment because the...more
On June 1, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court held, in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., that an employer violates federal anti-discrimination law where an applicant’s need for a religious...more
Yesterday, in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., 575 U.S. ___ (2015), the Supreme Court of the United States held that an applicant does not need to inform an employer of her need for a religious accommodation in order...more
The U.S. Supreme Court sided with the EEOC today and clarified the standard for religious accommodation and disparate-treatment claims under Title VII. The Court ruled that an applicant can advance a disparate-treatment claim...more
Monday, in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. the Supreme Court held that making employment decisions based on assumptions related to religion (or any other protected class for that matter) can trigger liability under...more
In a decision that came as no major surprise to Supreme Court watchers, on June 1, 2015, the Court ruled 8-1 in EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch that Abercrombie & Fitch violated the civil rights of a Muslim job applicant when it...more
What makes 'Abercrombie' difficult for employers is that the employee does not necessarily need to request an accommodation first. First Glance analysis of a recent SCOTUS decision on religious accommodation with broad...more
In a closely-watched case arising from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held yesterday that an applicant or employee need not prove that an employer had...more
On June 1, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an applicant rejected for a retail store position by Abercrombie & Fitch because she wore a headscarf could maintain a Title VII claim against the retailer, even though she...more
In a case we discussed earlier, the U.S. Supreme Court did not appear impressed with Abercrombie & Fitch's recent argument that a hijab wearing applicant needed to ask for religious accommodation before they were obliged to...more
WASHINGTON-- Samantha Elauf filed the original charge of religious discrimination with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) that led to today's argument in the Supreme Court. She has the following statement...more
An employer’s obligation to raise the issue of potential accommodations for religious discrimination under Title VII will soon receive clarification, as the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear E.E.O.C. v. Abercrombie & Fitch...more