Discrimination, Employee Rights, Employment Litigation

Risques à surveiller en matière de congédiement déguisé

Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP on 7/14/2025

Les risques d’allégations de congédiement déguisé demeurent une préoccupation importante pour les employeurs canadiens, en particulier dans le contexte de changements opérationnels. Les tribunaux considèrent qu’un...more

Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services: What the Supreme Court’s Unanimous Ruling Means for Employers and DEI Policies

Conn Maciel Carey LLP on 7/14/2025

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

The Supreme Court ‘Ames’ to Clarify that All Discrimination Claims Must Be Treated Equally

BakerHostetler on 7/10/2025

As the summer comes into full swing and many employees take time off to enjoy summer vacation, the same cannot be said for employers. It has been no secret that private sector diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs...more

Ames v Ohio Department of Youth Services: SCOTUS Removes Additional Requirement in “Reverse Discrimination” Cases

Butler Snow LLP on 6/23/2025

In a decision issued June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court unanimously found that the burden of proof on a plaintiff asserting an employment discrimination claim is the same, regardless of whether the plaintiff is...more

At-Will Doctrine Still Applies to Disciplinary Action Following Employer Investigations

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on 6/20/2025

Here is a common scenario faced by human resources professionals: An employee complains about unprofessional and bullying behavior by a coworker. After interviewing the two employees and other workers, the employer cannot...more

Breaking News: U.S. Supreme Court Makes It Easier for Employees to Prove “Reverse Discrimination”

Amundsen Davis LLC on 6/9/2025

Hune 5th, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified in the case of Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services, that “the standard for proving disparate treatment under Title VII does not vary based on whether or not the plaintiff is a...more

BREAKING: SCOTUS overrules higher standard for majority group asserting bias claims

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on 6/6/2025

On June 5th the U.S. Supreme Court held that majority-group plaintiffs do not have to show special “background circumstances” to support a Title VII discrimination claim. ...more

Better Late Than Never? Not in the 5th Circuit: Delayed Action on Accommodation May Be ADA Violation

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on 5/28/2025

Earlier this month, in Strife v. Aldine Independent School District, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employer’s delayed accommodation of an employee’s disability could amount to a failure to accommodate under...more

PIP This: The Expansion of Actionable Adverse Employment Decisions in the Wake of Muldrow v. City of St. Louis

Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL on 5/9/2025

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

Return to Office Mandates: Best Practices and Minimizing Litigation Risks

Farella Braun + Martel LLP on 5/8/2025

The transition to in-person work after years of permitting and promoting remote work presents unique challenges for nonprofit organizations. While returning to the office (RTO) can enhance collaboration and workplace culture,...more

Action Required for NY State Employers Under New York’s Reproductive Health Bias Law (the “Act”)

Tarter Krinsky & Drogin LLP on 3/28/2025

New York State’s Reproductive Health Bias Law (the “Act”) has been reinstated following a Second Circuit ruling. The Act, found in Section 203-e of New York State’s Labor Law, prohibits discrimination based on an employee’s...more

Time Was Not on Her Side: 5th Circuit Rules Unpaid Mentor’s Claim of Discrimination Is Untimely

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on 3/11/2025

In Title VII actions, plaintiffs have a limited amount of time to file a charge of discrimination (or a court can dismiss the case as untimely). In the case of Wells v. Texas Tech University, the timeliness dynamic was...more

EEOC backtracks on transgender, pregnancy; full speed ahead against “anti-American” bias

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on 2/21/2025

I reported a few weeks ago that President Trump fired two Democratic Commissioners of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (former Chair Charlotte Burrows and Jocelyn Samuels). He appointed Commissioner Andrea Lucas...more

French Employers May Decline Internal Investigations for Misconduct or Noncompliance

Morgan Lewis on 2/17/2025

The Défenseur des Droits published on February 5, 2025 a framework decision confirming that employers are not required to conduct an internal investigation unless they receive claims of discrimination or sexual harassment...more

UK Court of Appeal provides guidance on freedom of expression in the workplace

Hogan Lovells on 2/13/2025

The decision makes it harder for employers to act against employees who express protected views to which others object. Disciplinary action in that situation could be discrimination because of an employee’s religion or...more

Reservist’s claim that employer was anti‑military goes down in flames

McAfee & Taft on 2/10/2025

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) prohibits employment discrimination and retaliation based on an employee’s military status or obligations. If an individual’s military status or their...more

7 strikes, and this employer is OUT!

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on 1/22/2025

Employer going to trial in age discrimination case. We had a blizzard last Friday (in North Carolina, 2 inches is a blizzard), and we still have ice and snow on the ground a week later. Anyway, I've had enough of winter now...more

New York Employers Must (Again) Provide Reproductive Health Notice of Rights in Employee Handbooks Following Second Circuit Ruling

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints on 1/22/2025

New York employers are – once again – required to provide employees with notice regarding New York’s reproductive health decision making protections. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated a lower court’s...more

Discrimination › Employee Rights › Employment Litigation