How to Balance Diverse Views in the Office
Off the Clock, On the Radar: Managing Off-Duty Conduct and Workplace Impact
Navigating Employee Integration in Mergers and Acquisitions: Lessons From Pretty Woman — Hiring to Firing Podcast
Legal Shifts in 2025 Put Employer Non-Compete Strategies at Risk - Employment Law This Week® - Spilling Secrets Podcast
Workplace ICE Raids Are Surging—Here’s How Employers Can Prepare - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
California Employment News: Gathering Information in a Workplace Investigation – Part 2 (Featured)
Handling References and Referrals While Safeguarding Your Business
Navigating the Maze: eDiscovery Essentials for Employers — Hiring to Firing Podcast
Multijurisdictional Employers, Part 1: Independent Contractors vs. Employees
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 42: Non-Compete Agreements with Mitchell Greggs of Maynard Nexsen
Creativity and Compliance: Innovating Ethics - Creativity in Corporate Compliance with Katie Lawler
Culture Crafters: Preventing and Fixing a Cultural Disconnect
DE Talk | Using Employment Networks to Connect with Individuals with Disabilities in an Ever-Changing Workforce
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 33: Generations in the Workplace with Caroline Warner of The South Carolina Power Team, Part 1
Managing Employee Compliance in Highly Regulated Industries — Hiring to Firing Podcast
The Labor Law Insider: Recent U.S. Supreme Court, NLRB Decisions Highlight Labor Issues in Higher Education
Podcast - The Latest on Antitrust and Non-Compete Agreements in Healthcare
Episode 16 | The Basics for Building Your Workforce
Protecting Trade Secrets When Facing Lawsuits or Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures
Episode 138 -- Employee Relations and Engagement in the COVID-19 Pandemic Era
A Maryland car dealership has agreed to pay $30,000 to settle a federal disability discrimination lawsuit centered on an employee’s use of an emotional support animal. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)...more
Effective October 1, 2025, updated regulations from the California Civil Rights Council will formally restrict the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in employment decision-making by California employers. In the...more
If an employee complains about a sexually suggestive picture circulating in the workplace that looks like her but is not, is that a hostile work environment complaint? It might be. In Lillian Carranza v. City of Los Angeles,...more
On July 23, 2025, the White House released “America’s AI Action Plan” and President Trump signed three Executive Orders addressing AI development, federal procurement, and infrastructure. The 25-page AI Action Plan focuses on...more
While artificial intelligence (AI) can be a powerful tool in a manager’s arsenal when it comes to efficiently making decisions, it is essential to use it ethically and fairly. Companies are no longer relying on AI solely to...more
Accommodate, accommodate, accommodate! I started practicing law two years before Congress enacted the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990), and four years before it took effect (1992 for larger employers, 1994 for smaller...more
On June 27, 2025, Director of the US Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) Catherine Eschbach issued a letter to federal contractors asking them to volunteer information on their efforts...more
On June 20, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) held in Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida that a retired employee who could no longer hold or seek to hold her job could not sue under the Americans with Disabilities Act...more
The drama of “It Ends With Us” has jumped from the book to the big screen to a real-life legal battle that offers a sharp reminder of how retaliation and digital misconduct can derail even the most powerful players in any...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, holding that members of a majority group are not required to meet a heightened evidentiary standard to prevail...more
On June 20, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued another important decision in Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida. This decision follows on the heels of Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services...more
Recently, the Supreme Court issued an opinion that lowered the bar for employees seeking to sue their employer. In Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a heterosexual white woman claimed that she suffered discrimination...more
In, Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified the scope of the Americans with Disabilities Act, holding that Title I’s employment discrimination provisions do not apply to individuals who are...more
In a recent decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that a factfinder could conclude that an employer’s six-month delay during the ADA interactive process could amount to a failure to...more
On June 20, 2025, in Stanley v. City of Sanford, the United States Supreme Court concluded that a retiree who could no longer work because of a disability is not a “qualified individual” entitled to protection under Title I...more
On June 5, 2025, a unanimous Supreme Court eliminated the requirement for a higher evidentiary standard for majority plaintiffs (white, male, heterosexual, etc.) who claim discrimination under Title VII (also known as reverse...more
A recent decision from the U.S. District Court in Kansas—Spears v. Thermo Fisher Scientific—ruled that a pay equity analysis conducted primarily for business purposes was not protected by attorney-client privilege or the work...more
The 2019 film “Late Night,” written by and starring Mindy Kaling, tells the story of a late-night talk show host, Katherine Newbury, played by Emma Thompson, whose all-male, all-white writing staff scrambles to add a female...more
On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court unanimously rejected the Sixth Circuit’s rule, which required plaintiffs of a majority group to satisfy an additional burden as part of establishing a prima facie case of Title...more
A recent Supreme Court decision clarified that discrimination claims brought by members of majority groups in so-called “reverse discrimination” cases cannot be subject to a heightened evidentiary burden. In Ames v. Ohio...more
In this featured episode of California Employment News, Lizbeth (Beth) West and Meagan Bainbridge present part two of the Workplace Investigation Series, discussing best practices for collecting information during a workplace...more
In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the Supreme Court last Thursday held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) imposes no additional requirements on majority-group...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of petitioner, Marlean Ames, a heterosexual woman, who commenced a reverse discrimination case against her former employer, the Ohio Department of Youth...more
In a case filed by a heterosexual woman claiming she was discriminated against due to her sexual orientation, a unanimous United States Supreme Court held that she should not be required to meet a higher standard to prove...more
The U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark, unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, 605 U.S. ___ (2025) on June 5, 2025, fundamentally altering the landscape for “reverse discrimination” claims under...more