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
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 Trump Administration and Republican Attorneys General have signaled that private sector employers could expect to be targets of enforcement measures seeking to eliminate diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility...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
On January 10, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida approved a nearly $1.5 million settlement agreement in a case brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against a retail...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
On July 25, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected the notion that harassing conduct must occur inside the workplace to be considered actionable. The court also affirmed the notion that “the totality...more
On April 29, 2024, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued its new Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace (the Guidance), the first update to its Guidance in over 20 years. Among the many...more
When transferring an employee or making changes to their job duties, employers now face an increased risk of claims under Title VII. On April 17, the US Supreme Court unanimously held that plaintiffs alleging discrimination...more
The Supreme Court made it easier for claimants to assert discrimination claims under Title VII in its April 17 ruling in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, et al. Previously, courts required a plaintiff to show that a workplace...more
On April 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously lowered the burden applicable to discriminatory transfer claims brought under Title VII. According to the Court, a showing of some harm—rather than significant or some...more
SCOTUS announces ‘some harm’ standard for Title VII claims based on a mandatory job transfer. The Supreme Court in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, et al., 601 U.S. ____ (April 17, 2024), held that where an...more
The Court's decision in Muldrow v. St. Louis requires plaintiffs to prove "some injury" respecting employment terms or conditions in discrimination cases....more
On April 17, 2024, in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, the Supreme Court of the United States held that an employer may violate Title VII’s anti-discrimination provisions when it transfers an employee even if the transfer did...more
On Wednesday, April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court provided an opening for workers to allege employment discrimination claims regarding job transfers based on sex, race, religion, or national origin. In Muldrow v....more
A federal appeals court has made it easier for plaintiffs to bring employment discrimination lawsuits, but failed to offer clear guidance on how employers can adjust policies to minimize litigation risk. The en banc...more
On August 18, 2023, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which holds jurisdiction over Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi, abandoned a decades-old interpretation that discrimination must be related to an “ultimate employment...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
While President Biden’s initial flurry of executive orders largely sought to address the pandemic and undo the regulatory legacy of his predecessor, one order places LGBTQ protection at the heart of the new Administration’s...more
An increasing number of employees identify their gender as nonbinary. “Nonbinary” includes people who do not identify their gender within the binary of male or female. Nonbinary identification and expression may include...more
On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, holding that, pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, covered employers may not...more
Pride Month - June is a time to celebrate many things: the beginning of summer; long, sun-filled days; and LGBT Pride Month, to name a few. For many, the events that take place during the month are a way to recognize the...more
The National Labor Relations Board, in its December 17th decision in Apogee Retail LLC d/b/a Unique Thrift Store, has reversed its prior rule and held that employer requirements that employees treat workplace investigations...more
The statute of limitations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 cannot be contractually shortened for litigation, the Sixth Circuit held on September 25, 2019 as a matter of first impression in Logan v. MGM Grand...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Laws protecting individuals from discrimination and harassment in the workplace are expanding rapidly at the state and local levels, while the federal landscape remains unclear regarding LGBTQ rights. ...more
Many employers offer paid parental leave policies to employees, affording new parents paid time off to care for a new child. Though some employers offer paid parental leave to both new mothers and fathers of equal length,...more