Disparate Impact & Enforcement Rollbacks: What’s the Tea in L&E?
Enforcement Priorities of the Second Trump Administration: The False Claims Act
#WorkforceWednesday®: New DOL Leadership, NLRB Quorum, EEOC Enforcement Priorities - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday®: How Will Trump’s Federal Changes Impact Employers? - Employment Law This Week®
Building Bridges – Rev. Al Sharpton’s Blueprint for Harlem’s Museum of Civil Rights
#WorkforceWednesday® - Key SCOTUS Decisions This Term for Employers - Employment Law This Week®
Webinar: Is Your DEI Policy Setting You Up for a Lawsuit?
DE Under 3: Title VII Prohibits Discriminatory Job Transfers Even Without Significant Harm, U.S. Supreme Court Unanimously Ruled
DE Under 3: EEOC Consent Decree Illustrated Enforcement Stance Regarding Natural Hair Texture & Race Discrimination
The Burr Broadcast: EEOC Strategic Enforcement Plan
#WorkforceWednesday: EEOC Enforcement Plan, California Expands Paid Sick Leave, and Strikes Across the Country - Employment Law This Week®
DE Under 3: U.S. EEOC Announced Year-End Litigation Round-Up for Fiscal Year 2023
#WorkforceWednesday: The Ripple Effect of the Supreme Court’s SFFA Ruling for Diversity in the Workplace - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law Now VII-134-Panel Discussion on Supreme Court's Affirmative Action Ruling and the Impact on Employer DEI Programs
DE Under 3: Title VII Actionable Adverse Employment Actions Not Limited to Only “Ultimate” Employment Decisions
Supreme Court Miniseries: Religious Accommodation at Work
Employment Law Now VII-133 - Hot Summer Employment Law Developments
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Introduces Heightened Standard for Religious Accommodation, Rules Against Affirmative Action, Protects “Expressive” Services - Employment Law This Week®
Business Better Podcast Episode: Is DEI at Risk? Considerations on the US Supreme Court Ruling Against Affirmative Action Programs
DE Under 3: New Controversial Proposed Rule Affecting Title VII
Reshaping the litigation landscape for workplace discrimination claims, last month, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Servs., 145 S. Ct. 1540 (June 5, 2025), that plaintiffs bringing so-called...more
In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the Supreme Court last Thursday held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) imposes no additional requirements on majority-group...more
The U.S. Supreme Court today swung wide open the door for all persons who experience employment discrimination based on their race, color, religion, sex or national origin to bring suit under Title VII of the 1964 Civil...more
Over the course of the last year, employers have faced increased claims from employees testing what constitutes an actionable adverse action under the anti-discrimination provision of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964...more
In recent years, a number of colleges and universities have added caste to their list of prohibited classifications under their anti-discrimination policies. Two Hindu professors at a public California university filed suit,...more
The Policy Week in Review, prepared by Littler’s Workplace Policy Institute (WPI), sets forth WPI’s updates on federal, state, and local matters, as well as Littler’s published in-depth analyses of the prior week....more
A Florida state court recently held that an employer violated the Florida Civil Rights Act by failing to accommodate an employee’s off-duty, off-site medical marijuana use to treat his disabilities....more
In a dispute over workplace vaccination requirements, a federal district court in Oregon joined a growing trend in workplace vaccination litigation when it ruled that a plaintiff’s allegations of religious conflict with...more
Following President Trump’s executive orders on diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) programs, recent statements from State Attorneys General (“State AGs”) highlight that employers should prepare for increased scrutiny...more
On February 5, 2025, upon her swearing-in, US Attorney General Pamela Bondi issued multiple policy memoranda identifying various priorities of the Department of Justice (DOJ) under the Trump Administration. Among them is a...more
Recent developments in federal AI policy, including the effective recission of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and Department of Labor (DOL) guidance on AI and workplace discrimination, have raised questions...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
Earlier this month, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (which includes North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia) vacated the district court’s grant of summary judgment for the employer in Wannamaker-Amos v. Purem Novi...more
“The Hamilton decision highlights the need for employers to stay up to date on legal developments. In this one decision, the Fifth Circuit opened the door for claims that just one day earlier were not actionable. Reviewing...more
On January 21, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order (EO) titled “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity.” This EO raises significant new considerations for companies across the United...more
On January 20, the White House released an Executive Order Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing. This order rescinded the Biden-era pro-DEI orders, including the mandate for federal agencies to...more
Resolves Federal Agency’s Charge of Sexual Harassment by Owner - CASPER, Wyo. – Waller’s Trucking Company, Inc., a family-owned Wyoming trucking company, will pay $124,000 and provide other relief to settle a sexual...more
Settles Federal Suit Company Refused to Hire Women for Driver and Warehouse Positions - MIAMI – Kane’s Furniture, LLC, a Florida-based furniture retail company, will pay $1,482,748.00 in monetary relief and provide...more
Employment discrimination in the workplace is alive and well. Indeed, according to Monster’s recent Workplace Discrimination Poll, only 9% of workers claim to have NOT faced some form of workplace discrimination. There have...more
Once an employer knows or has reason to know about alleged harassment, it has an obligation to promptly remedy the hostile work environment, even if the offensive conduct occurred wholly offsite, online, or off-duty. This...more
Picture this: You're packing up your office, getting ready to head home for the evening, when your human resources manager peaks her head in. She explains that she has just fielded a complaint from a female employee: a male...more
Here’s a refresher: Discriminating against a subclass of a sex (e.g., older women or black women) is still discrimination. In McCreight v. AuburnBank, the Eleventh Circuit clarified a few things for the lawyers related to the...more
Social media has truly changed our world, both in and outside of the workplace. It has evolved into a daily habit for many of us; the way we get news about the world and our friends, the way we shop, gossip, and much more. It...more
Employers have a duty to ensure that their workplaces are not hostile, both in the physical and virtual worlds. This responsibility extends to both actual and constructive knowledge of potential issues....more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on July 25, 2024, ruled that under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, companies can be held liable for claims of a hostile work environment if an employee shares...more