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
Within the last two months, both the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the armed services have followed Trump Administration directives to narrow or eliminate protections for transgender individuals....more
Reverberations from the Trump administration’s recent executive order (EO) denouncing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices intensified Friday when a federal judge in Baltimore issued a nationwide preliminary...more
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act requires employees alleging employment discrimination to show they suffered an adverse employment action as a result of their membership in a protected class....more
In April, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, that to sustain a prima facie case of employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), plaintiffs do...more
In a recent decision, Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified the standard for determining whether an adverse employment action is a sufficient basis for a discrimination claim under Title VII of the...more
In a recent U.S. Supreme Court case, a police sergeant alleged that she was transferred from one job to a less desirable job in the police department because of her sex....more
On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, a case involving a St. Louis Police Department officer’s claim that she was subject to a discriminatory job...more
If you transfer an employee to a job with no loss in pay or title but the employee thinks it is less desirable, can that employee sue you for discrimination under Title VII? While it depends on the facts, in Muldrow v. St....more
For decades, courts in the Fifth Circuit have followed a particularly strict rule limiting when employees can sue under Title VII for workplace discrimination. That changed last Friday....more
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Hamilton v. Dallas County expanded the scope of claims employees may pursue under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII is the anti-discrimination statute...more
On August 18, 2023, in Hamilton v. Dallas County, the full Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upended a longstanding precedent, significantly broadening the types of adverse employment actions that could give rise to an...more
On August 18, 2023, the Fifth Circuit overturned its longstanding precedent established in Dollis v. Rubin, 77 F.3d 777 (5th Cir. 1995). The new standard created in Hamilton v. Dallas County, case number 21-10133, allows for...more
In what is being portrayed as a significant victory for women in sports, the United States women’s national soccer team (USWNT) announced a $24 million-dollar settlement of a class action equal pay action against the U.S....more
For the past several years, companies have been focused on creating and executing meaningful diversity, equity and inclusion (DE&I) programs to address the multi-faceted challenges—and opportunities—of diversifying their...more
That this past year was the most challenging year in your professional life is an almost certainty. You were forced to learn entirely new statutory schemes, absorb new local health directives on a near-daily basis, create a...more
Is it discriminatory to discipline employees for wearing #BLM face masks? When does Supervisor Karen cross the line from rude into discrimination? And join us to count down the top eight things you should never, ever say in...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
Seyfarth Synopsis: Stepping into a new year always gives one a chance to reflect on the lessons and trends of the prior year. In that spirit, we are pleased to present our annual selections for the five most intriguing...more
On May 13, 2019, a federal judge in Muskogee, Oklahoma, ruled against a plaintiff who alleged that that the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs denied her a job as a physician because she was a woman and was from Puerto Rico....more
Last month, the en banc Eleventh Circuit clarified the appropriate standard for analyzing “similarly situated” comparator evidence in Title VII intentional-discrimination cases. Lewis v. City of Union City, Ga., --- F.3d...more
The U.S. Supreme Court announced on April 22, 2019 that it will decide whether gay, lesbian, and transgender workers are expressly protected under federal civil rights law on the basis of their sexual orientation. The Court...more
On March 21, 2019, a 9-3 en banc majority announced that a plaintiff proceeding under the McDonnell Douglas framework must demonstrate as a part of her prima facie case that she and her comparators are “similarly situated in...more
An employer’s failure to stop a false rumor that a female employee slept with her male boss in order to obtain a promotion can give rise to liability under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, according to a recent...more
On March 8, 2019, all 28 players on the women’s national team initiated a proposed class and collective action in federal court against the U.S. Soccer Federation. Their action alleged discrimination based on sex in violation...more
In a decision that could have wide-ranging implications for all employers, the Fourth Circuit recently held that an employer’s failure to stop a false rumor that a female employee slept with her male boss to obtain a...more