Why the Increase in Demeaning Women Online Matters for Your Workplace: What's the Tea in L&E?
What's the Tea in L&E? "Passive" Harassment: When Does Workplace Decor Contribute to a Hostile Environment?
What's the Tea in L&E? Truth Hurts or Rumors? Lizzo’s Harassment Allegations Serve As A Good Reminder
Middle East Conflict Impact on the Healthcare Workplace: An HR Perspective
The Labor Law Insider - Pause Before You Discipline: NLRB Turns Against Civility in Lion Elastomers Decision
Labor & Employment Law: Vermont and Federal Legislative Update
Politics at Work
Employment Law Now: III-47 - New York, New World
III-41- Things That Make You Go “Hmmm” in Employment Law
Ann Curry’s Departure from the Today Show Presents a Number of Lessons for Employers
In the wake the U.S. Supreme Court’s April 2024 decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, some federal courts feel compelled or justified applying the same rationale to lower the standard to prove up workplace harassment...more
In a win for employers, the Connecticut Supreme Court defines “supervisor” narrowly for purposes of vicarious employer liability under Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act - Under Connecticut’s civil rights law, an...more
If an employer or coworker persistently uses a transgender worker’s wrong name or identified pronoun, can that constitute a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII? In Copeland v. Georgia Department of Corrections,...more
On April 29, 2024 the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) published its final guidance on harassment in the workplace. As Proskauer previously covered, this final guidance follows proposed guidance,...more
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a crucial set of guidelines on workplace harassment on April 29, 2024, by publishing the "Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace". These guidelines are...more
Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, there has been in increase in litigation challenging employers’ Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion policies and practices. In one recent...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: One of the most anticipated employment cases of the term was recently argued before the United States Supreme Court. In Muldrow v. City of St. Louis the Court requested the parties address the issue:...more
The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) released proposed guidance on September 29, 2023, that explains the legal standards imposed and outlines employer liability with respect to harassment claims...more
As we discussed in our previous blog post, in 2021 the EEOC issued a technical assistance guidance addressing employers’ obligations under Bostock v. Clayton County, the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2020 landmark decision holding...more
On October 1, 2022, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas held that Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) guidance addressing sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination in...more
Downs Rachlin Martin labor and employment attorneys Amy Resnick and Andrea Wright highlight key Vermont and Federal legislative updates from 2020 that impact HR professionals. They walk through: Vermont minimum wage...more
Welcome to the Summer 2020 issue of The Employment Law Reporter. This inaugural issue of this quarterly newsletter first reviews the landmark U.S. Supreme Court opinion in which the Court ruled that an employer that fires an...more
The U.S. Supreme Court held in Green v. Brennan that the statute of limitations for a constructive discharge begins to run on the date of resignation, not the date of the employer’s last discriminatory act, resolving a...more
But Decision Could Still Be Helpful For Employers - Today, in a unanimous 8-0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to issue a definitive ruling on whether an employer is entitled to recover nearly $5 million dollars...more
On May 19, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in CRST, Inc. v. EEOC, which addressed the definition of a “prevailing party” who may be awarded attorneys’ fees in Title VII cases. Although the Court ultimately...more
In a case of first impression at the appellate level, the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Western District of Missouri has held that the Missouri Human Rights Act (“MHRA”) does not prohibit discrimination based on sexual...more
A Second Circuit panel recently revived a former employee’s racial discrimination suit against New York City, reversing in part the Southern District of New York’s dismissal of her case. In Littlejohn v. City of New York,...more
In 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States held that plaintiffs claiming retaliation under Title VII must prove that “but for” the retaliation they would not have been discharged. University of Texas Southwestern Medical...more
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
In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court decided what the definition of a "supervisor" is for purposes of assessing liability for unlawful harassment under Title VII. The Court ruled that an employer will be vicariously...more