News & Analysis as of

Hiring & Firing › McDonnell Douglas Formula

Hiring & Firing refers to the process of recruiting, interviewing and offering employment and the process of evaluating performance and dismissing employees. Hiring & Firing is a highly regulated area and... more +
Hiring & Firing refers to the process of recruiting, interviewing and offering employment and the process of evaluating performance and dismissing employees. Hiring & Firing is a highly regulated area and can create tremendous liability for employers who fail to properly adhere to acceptable employment practices. Some of the potential pitfalls in this area stem from discriminatory hiring practices, improper performance evaluations, and retaliatory firings.  less -
Littler

McDonnell Douglas Lives Another Day: A Win for Employers at the Minnesota Supreme Court

Littler on

The Minnesota Supreme Court recently reaffirmed the use of the familiar McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework to analyze claims of retaliation under Minnesota law, despite the ask by the plaintiff-appellant and amici to...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

California Supreme Court Sets Framework for Whistleblower Retaliation Claims

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on

A territory manager for paint and coatings manufacturer PPG Architectural Finishes, Wallen Lawson was responsible for stocking and merchandising PPG paint products in Lowe’s home improvement stores in Southern California....more

Akerman LLP - HR Defense

California Supreme Court Clarifies Whistleblower Retaliation Standard

Akerman LLP - HR Defense on

California employers can expect to see an uptick in whistleblower claims as a result of a recent California Supreme Court ruling that increases the burden on employers to prove that adverse employment actions are based on...more

Epstein Becker & Green

#WorkforceWednesday: CA Whistleblower Retaliation Cases, NYC Pay Transparency Law, Biden’s Labor Agenda - Employment Law This...

Epstein Becker & Green on

This week, we’re recapping major items shifting at the state, local, and federal levels, including whistleblower retaliation case law, pay transparency rules, and federal labor policies. California Supreme Court Specifies...more

Fisher Phillips

California Supreme Court Lowers the Bar for Plaintiffs in Whistleblower Act Claims

Fisher Phillips on

The California Supreme Court just made things a bit more difficult for employers by lowering the bar and making it easier for disgruntled employees and ex-employees to bring state whistleblower claims against businesses. The...more

Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP

California Supreme Court Makes It Easier For Whistleblowers to Prove Retaliation

Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP on

The California Supreme Court, in a critical decision, has answered a key question regarding whistleblower retaliation claims. Last year, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals certified an important question to the Court...more

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

It is Now Easier For Federal Workers to Prove Age Bias

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP on

Last week, the US Supreme Court made it easier for a federal worker to establish a claim for age bias. This decision does not impact private employers, because it relied on the specific language of the federal sector...more

Fisher Phillips

Supreme Court Makes It Easier For Federal Workers To Prove Age Discrimination

Fisher Phillips on

In an 8-to-1 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court just made it easier for federal employees and applicants to prove age discrimination by ruling that courts should not apply a heightened causation standard in such cases. By...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Babb v. Wilkie, No. 18-882

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on

On April 6, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Babb v. Wilkie, holding that the federal-sector provision of the Age Discrimination and Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. §633a(a), does not require proof that age...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Following Supervisor’s “Not Working Out” Comment, EEOC Defeats Employer’s Motion For Summary Judgment In ADA Lawsuit

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: A federal district court in Arkansas recently denied an employer’s motion for summary judgment on two EEOC-initiated ADA claims – in EEOC v. Crain Automotive Holdings LLC, No. 4:17-CV-627, 2019 U.S. Dist....more

Burr & Forman

11th Circuit Clarifies “Similarly Situated” Standard for Discrimination Claims

Burr & Forman on

On March 21, 2019, a 9-3 en banc majority announced that a plaintiff proceeding under the McDonnell Douglas framework must demonstrate as a part of her prima facie case that she and her comparators are “similarly situated in...more

FordHarrison

Eleventh Circuit Clarifies Standard for Identifying Comparators in Title VII and ADA Discrimination Cases

FordHarrison on

On March 21, 2019, in Lewis v. Union City, No. 15-11362, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (1) clarified the proper standard for the comparator analysis in intentional discrimination cases under the McDonnell...more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Chris Lazarini Comments on Direct vs. Circumstantial Evidence in Discrimination Case

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

Bass, Berry & Sims attorney Chris Lazarini commented on a case in which a former financial advisor of JPMS claimed his employment was terminated based on racial discrimination. Through application of the three-part burden...more

Zuckerman Spaeder LLP

Fifth Circuit Derails Reverse Discrimination Claims Against Amtrak

Zuckerman Spaeder LLP on

White male discontent has been a major media talking point since the presidential election, and even long before. This talking point has made its way into the workplace, where tech firms are now being targeted for allegedly...more

Littler

Seventh Circuit to Plaintiffs: Here's Your Burden of Proof

Littler on

Most employees who file employment discrimination claims hope for one of two things – a really sympathetic jury or an employer that is willing to generously settle the lawsuit to avoid the risks and uncertainties of trial. ...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Quirky Question #287: “Cat’s Paw” Claims – How could an employer violate antidiscrimination laws, even though the decision-making...

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Question: We just went through a five-person layoff, and one of the individuals laid off (an African American) has hired a lawyer and is threatening to sue for racial discrimination. I have enormous confidence in the fairness...more

Mintz - Employment, Labor & Benefits...

Massachusetts SJC Lightens Plaintiffs’ Summary Judgment Burden in Employment Discrimination Cases

Mintz - Employment, Labor & Benefits... on

Last week, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued a seminal ruling in Bulwer v. Mt. Auburn, which clarified the type of evidence an employment discrimination plaintiff needs to defeat a summary judgment motion. In...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Retaliation in the Fourth Circuit: Recent Decision Creates New Challenges for Employers

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on

In May 2015, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (which has jurisdiction over federal courts in Maryland, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina) issued an opinion with negative consequences for employers...more

Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel LLP

Employment Retaliation Claims – Still Alive and Well (and Potentially Dangerous)

Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel LLP on

Federal law and most state laws protect employees who complain about discrimination and harassment from retaliatory adverse employment actions (such as demotion or termination). Because retaliation claims can succeed even...more

19 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide