A Retaliation Refresher: What's the Tea in L&E?
DE Under 3: Title VII Actionable Adverse Employment Actions Not Limited to Only “Ultimate” Employment Decisions
DE Under 3: Reversal of 2019 Enterprise Rent-a-Car Trial Decision; EEOC Commissioner Nominee Update; Overtime Listening Session
#WorkforceWednesday: CA COVID-19 Policies Get Updates, NYC Pay Transparency Law Postponed, DOL Targets Worker Retaliation - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: CA Whistleblower Retaliation Cases, NYC Pay Transparency Law, Biden’s Labor Agenda - Employment Law This Week®
Managing the Size and Structure of Your Post-Pandemic Workforce
Political and Controversial Activity in the Workplace [More with McGlinchey Ep. 11]
Workplace Violence Rises During COVID-19 - Employment Law This Week®
Social Media + Employees = Hot Mess
Warning Signs that Signal You Might be Terminated from Your Job
The Basics of Michigan’s Social Media Password Law & Why It Isn’t Such a Great Idea
On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, resolving a long-standing split among federal courts and clarifying the evidentiary standard for Title...more
On April 2, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a truck driver who lost his job after testing positive for marijuana may pursue claims for lost wages under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt...more
Employers often place employees on paid administrative leave while they investigate accusations of employee misconduct or make decisions regarding the employees’ employment. Traditionally, most federal courts agreed that this...more
To prevail on a discrimination claim under Title VII and similar anti-discrimination laws, the employee bringing suit must prove that he or she suffered an “adverse employment action” because of a legally protected...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
On December 6, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) heard arguments in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri—a potentially pivotal case concerning whether Title VII requires plaintiffs to establish a...more
The Supreme Court’s blockbuster decisions last term dominated the headlines – and many rulings will have a lasting impact on employer practices. The Justices continued to shape the workplace law landscape by ruling on an...more
On April 18, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Groff v. DeJoy, a case raising the issue of how great a burden an employer must bear in order to accommodate an employee’s religious belief or practices....more
Employment litigators and Constitutional Law attorneys alike should pay close attention to the United States Supreme Court’s calendar, as the Court recently agreed to take up a case that has the potential to change the way...more
Several recent Supreme Court decisions have upended causation standards in the statutory alphabet soup of federal remedial rights. It is now clear that “but for” causation governs discrimination claims under the Age...more
Recently, the First Circuit Court of Appeals held that former employees of a FEMA call center could not proceed in their Title VII location-based disparate impact and retaliation claims against the agency. The case,...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