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
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
Since 1973, federal courts reviewing claims of employment discrimination have used a framework first established by the U.S. Supreme Court’s McDonnell Douglas decision. Under this framework, plaintiffs must show a prima facie...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
On January 7, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed and remanded a district court’s dismissal of a plaintiff’s Title VII religious bias suit—holding the case was sufficient to survive a motion to...more
A North Carolina restaurant franchisee has agreed to pay $40,000 and take other corrective measures to settle a religious discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed by the EEOC after being accused of denying a cook’s...more
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers with 15 or more employees from discriminating against employees and applicants on the basis of religion (as well as race, color, sex, and national origin), and it...more
In last term’s decision in Groff v. DeJoy, the U.S. Supreme Court significantly increased employers’ obligation to consider religious exemption requests under Title VII. Rather than the previous de minimus burden standard,...more
In a July 28, 2023 ruling, the Seventh Circuit has signaled that Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) seeking to enforce pronoun policies can expect to face increased scrutiny. Specifically, the Seventh Circuit vacated its...more
Many workplace leaders have been wondering, “Can we require employees to get the COVID-19 vaccine as a condition of employment?” According to a recent Ogletree Deakins benchmarking survey, most employers are not ready to...more
Based on praise from various friends and colleagues, the lovely Mrs. Reed and I recently began watching Greenleaf, a series on the Oprah Winfrey Network (OWN) that ran from 2016 to 2020....more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In an EEOC-initiated religious discrimination suit involving an employer’s alleged imposition of “Onionhead” religious practices, a federal district court in New York recently denied the employer’s motion...more
Company Fired Seventh-Day Adventist Because She Refused to Work on Her Sabbath, Federal Agency Charged - RALEIGH, N.C. - Cottle Strawberry Nursery, Inc., a corporation based in Faison, N.C., that has grown, packed,...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Vaccinations have been widely debated over the past few years, leaving employers unclear about their obligations to accommodate employees whose religious beliefs conflict with them. Recently the U.S. Court...more
In the film Night School, the main character experiences a workplace that mixes religion and the workplace in a way that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) would not approve of....more
Employers must walk a tightrope when dealing with an employee or applicant seeking a religious accommodation as demonstrated by two recent court cases with opposite results....more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The 8th Circuit recently held that while a request for a religious accommodation may qualify as a protected activity, it is not necessarily “oppositional” so as to give rise to an opposition-clause...more
Title VII requires employers to make “reasonable accommodations” for an employee’s religious practices. But what is “reasonable” has been the subject of much debate and litigation. ...more
We have previously discussed how to protect against religious discrimination claims and best practices when addressing requests for religious accommodations. A recent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In a recent decision, the Eighth Circuit held that Title VII does not require an employer to provide an employee a reason for termination at the time of termination, and that an employer is not strictly...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Mandatory vaccines and flu shots present challenges to employers attempting to accommodate the sincerely held religious beliefs of employees. In this case, a hospital worker claimed that he was terminated...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: We are once again pleased to offer our loyal blog readers a breakdown of the five most intriguing developments in EEOC litigation in 2017, in addition to a pre-publication preview of our annual report on...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: With uncertain times and profound changes anticipated for the EEOC, employers anxiously await what enforcement litigation the EEOC has in store. Although 2016 showed a marked decline in filings, fiscal year...more
Retirement Community Demanded Two Employees Work on Sabbath, Federal Agency Charges - CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. -- Century Park Associates, LLC, dba Garden Plaza at Greenbriar Cove, which operates a senior and assisted living...more
The U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals (whose rulings apply to all South Carolina employers) recently decided a religious accommodation case in which a jury awarded a former employee more than half a million dollars. The Equal...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: A recent decision by a federal district court in Minnesota held that a religious accommodation request is not “protected activity” under Title VII. In defending retaliation litigation, employers should...more