How to Balance Diverse Views in the Office
New DOJ Memo Warns Employers: Rethink DEI Programs Now - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Strengthening Your Hiring Process
Off the Clock, On the Radar: Managing Off-Duty Conduct and Workplace Impact
Blowing the Whistle: What Employers Should Know About DEI & the False Claims Act
Law Firm ERGs Under Scrutiny: Navigating Compliance, Risk, and Culture - On Record PR
The Changing Landscape of EEOC Enforcement and Disparate Impact
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 44: Conducting Effective Workplace Investigations with Kimberly Hewitt and Antwan Lofton of Duke University
Navigating DEI in a Shifting Legal Landscape: Insights From Late Night — Hiring to Firing Podcast
What's the Tea in L&E? Why You Need Policies for Temps and Other Contractors
A Deep Dive into HUD's New Guidance on AI-Driven Targeted Advertising — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Non-Disparagement Settlements in New Jersey, DOL's AI Guidelines, OSHA Regions Shift - Employment Law This Week®
What's the Tea in L&E? Weight Discrimination
The Burr Broadcast: EEOC Strategic Enforcement Plan
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 3: Top Labor & Employment Issues for 2024 with Jennie Cluverius, Cherie Blackburn, and Christy Rogers
Updates to Statute 1557 that Healthcare Providers Need to Know
DE Under 3: New Administrative Review Board Decision from March Sets Down New Backpay Calculation in Litigated OFCCP Cases
DE Under 3: OFCCP Discrimination Enforcement Statistics Hit New Lows
#WorkforceWednesday: NLRB Issues Stericycle Decision, EEOC Proposes Pregnant Worker Rule, EEOC Settles First AI Anti-Discrimination Suit - Employment Law This Week®
DE Under 3: OFCCP Announced “Pre-Enforcement Notice & Conciliation Procedures” Final Rule
The New Jersey Appellate Division recently issued an important decision clarifying how claims brought under the Law Against Discrimination (LAD) interact with agency proceedings in employment matters. Specifically, it made...more
Recently, the Supreme Court issued an opinion that lowered the bar for employees seeking to sue their employer. In Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a heterosexual white woman claimed that she suffered discrimination...more
On June 5, 2025, in a unanimous and highly anticipated decision, the U.S. Supreme Court in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, No. 23-1039, clarified a critical point in employment law: all employees—regardless of...more
Earlier this month, the United States Supreme Court confirmed that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 guarantees equal protection to all employees, even if they belong to majority or minority groups....more
In a decision issued June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court unanimously found that the burden of proof on a plaintiff asserting an employment discrimination claim is the same, regardless of whether the plaintiff is...more
Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis that has resulted in profound changes to when employees can claim discrimination relating to job decisions that do not appear to have much...more
When I think of employment discrimination, I generally think of someone in a traditional majority group (e.g., white or male) firing someone in a minority group (e.g., African American or female) because of sex or race. But...more
An in-house attorney recently sued his former employer in a Utah federal district court for discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, alleging he was unlawfully fired after posting social...more
Hune 5th, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified in the case of Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services, that “the standard for proving disparate treatment under Title VII does not vary based on whether or not the plaintiff is a...more
On June 5th, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision making it easier for employees to prove claims of so-called “reverse” discrimination (i.e., suits brought by a member of a majority group alleging to have been treated...more
On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court lowered the bar for majority-group plaintiffs – ruling they are not required to meet a higher standard to bring reverse discrimination claims. The Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Ames v....more
On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, striking down the “background circumstances” requirement in so-called “reverse discrimination” cases. The Court held...more
When an employee complains of discrimination or harassment, companies often investigate the matter. Doing so allows a company to address alleged improper behavior and it may allow the company to avoid potential liability –...more
The Wisconsin Supreme Court has clarified that non-criminal, municipal citations are covered by the prohibition on arrest record discrimination under the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act (WFEA). The court also narrowed the...more
Former Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) commissioners and legal representatives have authored an open letter addressed to the legal community in response to an EEOC document released on March 19, 2025, by Acting...more
As the first point of contact for employee claims, HR directors often find themselves with the challenging task of assessing sensitive situations. This, coupled with ensuring both the company’s policies are followed, and...more
Over the past year, numerous class actions have been filed against large employers claiming their health plan surcharge for tobacco use is not in compliance with HIPAA nondiscrimination rules. With yet another lawsuit filed...more
With a significant rise in diagnoses, it is more important than ever that employers have an understanding and awareness of neurodiversity in the workplace. Below, we explore the perspectives of the UK and Poland in managing...more
The decision makes it harder for employers to act against employees who express protected views to which others object. Disciplinary action in that situation could be discrimination because of an employee’s religion or...more
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a directive to its Civil Rights Division, freezing all ongoing or new litigation. The specifics of the freeze are not clear; however, it appears to freeze new claims presented to...more
Don’t finalize your 2025 handbooks just yet! On January 2, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated a permanent injunction, which had blocked a requirement that New York employers with...more
The allure of doing business in California is undeniable. It is the world’s fifth (and moving towards fourth) largest economy and a market of over 39 million people. For employers, however, California presents unique...more
While not enough blogs these days quote Toad the Wet Sprocket lyrics, a recent decision from a federal appellate court holding that a would-be employee can suffer negative employment consequences for cannabis use even when...more
On August 22, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its decision in Synoracki v. Alaska Airlines, Inc., reviving a class action under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act...more
A little more than a year after U.S. Army veteran Le Roy Torres kept his case alive at the U.S. Supreme Court, a Texas jury voted unanimously to award him $2.49 million on the claim that his former employer, the Texas...more