DE Under 3: Data Gathering & Data Delivery
DE Under 3: New Data Collection Burdens, NLRB’s Ruling Regarding Union Election Dismissals, and OMB’s Tech Modernization Fund
The Year Ahead: Litigation Hot Spots at a Glance
Illegal or ill-mannered? Title VII meets Ms. Manners
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Decision on LGBTQ Employees, EEOC on Older Workers Returning to Work - Employment Law This Week®
Global Employment Policies - Employment Law This Week® - Trending News
II-25 – Top 10 New Year’s Resolutions for Employers in 2018
Episode 25: EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum Part II: Other Emerging EEOC Trends + Takeaways
I-16 – Kneeling, Indefinite Leave, DC Updates, Non-Compete Consideration, and Pretty as a Protected Class
Employment Law This Week®: Class Action Waiver Cases, Rescission of Tip-Pooling Restrictions, Title VII & Sexual Orientation, Updated Form I-9
Part 1 of 2: My Sit-Down Interview With Former EEOC General Counsel David Lopez
Federal Agency Charges That the Companies Discriminated Against Employees Because of Their Sexual Orientation and/or Gender Identity - MOBILE, Ala. and CHICAGO – Harmony Hospitality LLC, which operates a Home2 Suites by...more
On April 4, 2024, the Honorable Judge Michael M. Baylson from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania partially granted and partially denied a motion to dismiss filed by a former employee who alleged discrimination by his...more
The Michigan Senate took a historic step Wednesday to increase workplace protections for members of the LGBTQ community by passing a law that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity,...more
The DE OFCCP Week in Review (WIR) is a simple, fast and direct summary of relevant happenings in the OFCCP regulatory environment, authored by experts John C. Fox, Candee Chambers and Cynthia L. Hackerott. In today’s edition,...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Employers can take precaution against discrimination claims by ensuring they have legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasoning for their decision-making. An honest explanation of their behavior makes it...more
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County,140 S. Ct. 1731, 1754 (2020) that expanded the prohibition against sex discrimination under Title VII (“Title VII”) of the Civil Rights Act to include discrimination on...more
The DE OFCCP Week in Review (WIR) is a simple, fast and direct summary of relevant happenings in the OFCCP regulatory environment, authored by experts John C. Fox, Candee Chambers and Jennifer Polcer. In today’s edition, they...more
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) observed LGBTQ+ Pride Month and the one-year anniversary of the landmark Bostock v. Clayton County Supreme Court decision by announcing new resources to aid employers in...more
Join Hinshaw and the LGBTQ+ Lawyers Association of Los Angeles on June 23, 2021, as we commemorate June Pride Month with a webinar featuring practical guidance on LGBTQ+ employment and workplace issues. This one-hour CLE...more
This week (specifically June 15, 2021) marked the one-year anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in the case of Bostock v. Clayton County, which outlawed sexual orientation or transgender status employment...more
As one of his first actions in office, President Joe Biden has issued an executive order ensuring that last year’s US Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. Clayton County is applied immediately and efficiently by all federal...more
Please join Nelson Mullins and LGBTQ+ leaders as we kick-off Atlanta Pride weekend with an online discussion of the legal and political battles ahead in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s Bostock decision and rethinking...more
The Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia marks a turning point and milestone victory for the LGBTQ+ community. The decision will impact the fight to end discrimination based on gender...more
In light of his Supreme Court win in June. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has revived a Title VII lawsuit filed by Gerald Bostock, who had sued Clayton County, Georgia, alleging that the county terminated...more
The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York has blocked the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) from enforcing a new rule that limited sex discrimination in healthcare to discrimination based...more
In a landmark ruling, a Beijing court ruled in favor of a transgender employee against her employer, a Chinese e-commerce company, interpreting China’s anti-discrimination laws to include protection based on sexual...more
On June 15, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a watershed decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, holding, for the first time, that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) prohibits discrimination in the...more
You have probably seen a lot of coronavirus news alerts lately, but as a car dealer, you already know that germs are not the only things that can cause headaches. Virus or no virus, the law is still going to change and...more
Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. ___, 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020) - The question for the United States Supreme Court in this (and two companion cases) was whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is violated by an...more
It’s hard to keep up with all the recent changes to labor and employment law. While the law always seems to evolve at a rapid pace, there have been an unprecedented number of changes for the past few years—and this past month...more
In June of this year, the United States Supreme Court held that an employer who fires an employee for being gay or transgender violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"). Title VII prohibits employers from refusing...more
On June 15, 2020, in a landmark 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated opinion in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia holding that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or sexual...more
This edition of Employment Flash summarizes key employment law issues related to COVID-19 as well as two seminal U.S. Supreme Court rulings that protect gay and transgender employees from discrimination, and clarify the...more
When the Supreme Court recently concluded that Title VII protects LGBTQ employees from discrimination based on their “sex” in its Bostock v. Clayton County opinion, many schools immediately asked: “What does this mean for...more