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
A Deaf, Indigenous woman claims an employer’s use of a popular automated video interview platform unfairly blocked her promotion due to AI-driven biases related to her disability and race. The ACLU filed charges on March 19...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
In April 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court held that transferring an employee to a new position with the same rank and pay may constitute an adverse action under Title VII. The recent decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis,...more
A “supervisor,” for purposes of a Connecticut state hostile work environment claim, is an employee who is empowered by an employer to take tangible employment actions, the Connecticut Supreme Court recently held in O’Reggio...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 its much-anticipated decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis (No. 22-193) and held that “some injury” is sufficient to establish a federal discrimination or...more
In Mobley v. Workday, the EEOC filed an amicus brief supporting a class-action plaintiff's theory that a Human Resources software company could be directly liable for employment discrimination allegedly caused by the vendor's...more
One of the decisions avid Supreme Court watchers (yes, aka employment law nerds) have been waiting for was Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri....more
Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits retaliation against employees because they either oppose discriminatory actions (the "Opposition Clause") or because of their participation in an investigation, proceeding, or...more
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects an employee’s conduct of complaining about Title VII violations. The Eleventh Circuit, however, has now provided the framework for when an employee’s otherwise protected conduct can...more
Staffing Agency Allowed Sexual Abuse of Several Women Placed in Jobs at Albuquerque Police Unit, Federal Agency Charged - ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. - Real Time Staffing Services, Inc., Employment Solutions Management, Inc., and...more
Lids' Retailer Fired Store Manager Who Reported Sexual Harassment and Filed a Charge with the EEOC, Federal Agency Charged - NORFOLK, Va. - Hat World, Inc., an Indianapolis-based retailer of sports hats and fan gear, will...more
Restaurant's Owner Sexually Harassed and Retaliated Against Female Employee, Federal Agency Charged - SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. - Rainbow Tree LLC, doing business as Persian Room Fine Dining, has agreed to pay $65,000 and...more
Communications Specialist Fired for Complaining About Race Discrimination, Federal Agency Charged - ATLANTA - The General Board of Global Ministries of the United Methodist Church, Inc., doing business as Global...more
Massage Therapy Company Fired Employee Because She Was Pregnant, Federal Agency Charged - ORLANDO, Fla. - Azul Wellness, LLC, doing business as Orlando Float, and Orlando massage therapy company, will pay $27,000 and...more
Like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Tennessee Human Rights Act (THRA) forbids sexual harassment as a form of sex discrimination. To be actionable, the harassment must be so severe or pervasive that it creates...more
Hospital Refused to Accommodate and Terminated Pregnant Worker, Federal Agency Said - SAN ANTONIO, Texas - Nix Hospitals System, LLC, doing business as Nix Healthcare System, a provider of comprehensive medical services,...more
Rather than conduct in breach of an inherent duty of loyalty to the employer, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a human resources representative engaged in protected activity under Title VII of the Civil...more
In late September, the Eleventh Circuit reversed a grant of summary judgment for Kia Motors Manufacturing of Georgia, Inc. on race and national origin retaliation claims brought by one of its HR managers. In the split...more
In “Alice in Wonderland,” the Queen of Hearts once proclaimed, “Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.” This appears to be the rallying cry of many plaintiffs across the country when...more