A Deep Dive into HUD's New Guidance on AI-Driven Targeted Advertising — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Fair Lending 101 for Debt Collectors - The Consumer Finance Podcast
DE Under 3: Reversal of 2019 Enterprise Rent-a-Car Trial Decision; EEOC Commissioner Nominee Update; Overtime Listening Session
#WorkforceWednesday: COVID-19 Vaccination Policies, Worker Organizing Task Force, Whistleblowing Increases - Employment Law This Week®
Illegal or ill-mannered? Title VII meets Ms. Manners
Pregnancy In the Workplace...Hot Off the Press
An unsuccessful job applicant is suing Sirius XM Radio in federal court, claiming the company’s AI-powered hiring tool discriminated against him based on his race. Filed on August 4 in the Eastern District of Michigan, the...more
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 generally prohibits covered employers from taking adverse actions against employees on the basis of race, sex, and other protected categories. Employee discipline is often the subject...more
On October 26, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit handed employers another reminder of the potential benefits of consistent management. In Dunlevy v. Langfelder, the Seventh Circuit upheld the appeal...more
For years, employment lawyers on both sides have disagreed on what is required to obtain class treatment in a Title VII discrimination case. ...more
In a case of first impression, a federal appeals court just found that an applicant’s request for a religious accommodation did not constitute protected activity under Title VII for the purpose of establishing a retaliation...more
A federal district court in Maryland recently denied in part an employer’s motion to dismiss a race discrimination action brought on behalf of African-born security guards by the EEOC, and instead granted the EEOC’s motion to...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Court of Appeal has held that an employer’s refusal to honor an employee’s rescission of a voluntary resignation is not an adverse employment action under the Fair Employment and Housing Act....more
Last week the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of a case the EEOC filed over a job applicant’s short dreadlocks. In 2010, Chastity Jones, an African American, applied for a position with...more
In Rollins v. Traylor Brothers, Case No. 14-CV-1414 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 21, 2016), Judge John Coughenour of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington certified the claims of a class of workers alleging...more
As the laws governing the treatment of pregnant employees and new mothers continues to evolve, one recent decision from the United States District Court for the Northern District Alabama highlights the complexities that arise...more
In a new order issued on November 13, 2015 in Brand, et al. v. Comcast Corp., Case No. 11-CV-8471 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 13, 2015), a matter we have previously blogged on here, Judge Matthew F. Kennelly of the U.S. District Court...more
In an order recently issued in EEOC v Jetstream Ground Services, Inc., Case No. 13-CV-02340 (D. Colo. Sept. 29, 2015), Judge Christine Arguello of the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado ruled that the EEOC had...more
In EEOC v. Autozone, Inc., Case No. 14-CV-5579 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 4, 2015), Judge Amy St. Eve of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant and against the...more
As most lawyers and HR professionals know, on June 1, 2015, Justice Antonin Scalia authored a concise opinion, overturning the Tenth Circuit and holding that Abercrombie & Fitch had intentionally discriminated against...more
On Monday, June 1, the Supreme Court decided a religious discrimination case involving Abercrombie & Fitch and the EEOC. The Court held that "[a]n employee may not make an applicant's religious practice, confirmed or...more