News & Analysis as of

Employment Discrimination Adverse Employment Action

Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti,...

Is A Performance Improvement Plan Actionable?

Performance improvement plans or PIPs are an effective tool to document an employee’s work issues, establishing constructive goals over a set time frame. Ideally, the employee improves their performance and works with...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Clarifying Standards for “Reverse” Discrimination, Coupled with Other Recent Changes (see Muldrow), could have Real Implications...

Did the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Serv., 145 S.Ct. 1540 (2025), decided in June of this year, make it easier for employees to bring discrimination lawsuits against their employers? The...more

Amundsen Davis LLC

National State Employment Law Update Covering the First Six Months of 2025

Amundsen Davis LLC on

2025 is halfway over, and already, there has been significant activity and legal developments throughout the U.S. on the state and local level.  Below is a recap of notable laws enacted throughout the U.S. that have become...more

Poyner Spruill LLP

Why Comparator Analysis Matters: A Key Fourth Circuit Ruling

Poyner Spruill LLP on

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

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP

The Coldplay Concert Kiss Cam Scandal: Legal and Employment Litigation Implications

We’ve all heard about and been astonished (or entertained) by the recent Coldplay concert kiss cam scandal involving the CEO and Chief People Officer of Astronomer, a data infrastructure and workflow company valued at over $1...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

Mandatory referral to EAP may be "adverse action," court says

"Some harm" is all it takes. A federal appeals court found this week that requiring an employee to enter an Employee Assistance Program may be an “adverse employment action” under the federal anti-discrimination laws....more

Gould + Ratner LLP

Coldplay Gate: What if It Happened at Your Company?

Gould + Ratner LLP on

The internet lit up recently with viral footage from a “kiss cam” at a Coldplay concert in Boston, Massachusetts. The clip, now dubbed by some as “Coldplay Gate,” depicts the married CEO of Astronomer, Inc., having an...more

Amundsen Davis LLC

Key Takeaways - Terminating the Problem Employee

Amundsen Davis LLC on

In our recent webcast, “Terminating the Problem Employee," the Labor & Employment team shared key considerations for employers looking to terminate a “problem employee” while avoiding controversy and litigation. Below are our...more

Ice Miller

Employee Terminations: Honesty is the Best Policy

Ice Miller on

Terminating an employee can be one of the most consequential decisions an employer can make. The best way to mitigate risk? Honesty....more

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

Recent Settlement Latest in Developing Trend in Reverse Discrimination Cases

It was announced on July 7 that IBM had resolved a former consultant’s ​“reverse” discrimination claim for an undisclosed sum, closing the door on his Title VII race and sex discrimination lawsuit. This settlement is yet...more

Conn Maciel Carey LLP

Common Questions in Evaluating a Whistleblower Complaint Filed with OSHA

Conn Maciel Carey LLP on

In FY 2023, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) received 3,243 Whistleblower complaints filed under various statutes’ anti-retaliation provisions. OSHA is charged with investigating alleged retaliation...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

Adverse employment actions require a decision maker. Make sure you have one.

Among the first questions I ask when investigating a lawsuit accusing my client of discriminatory conduct is, “Who made the decision?” The reasons are simple. First, an adverse employment action – like termination,...more

Bodman

Supreme Court Eliminates “Background Circumstances” Test for Title VII Claims

Bodman on

In a unanimous decision, the United States Supreme Court has formalized and affirmed the legal standard for employment discrimination claims for non-minority groups under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964....more

Warner Norcross + Judd

Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Evidentiary Standard for Majority-Group Plaintiffs in Title VII Discrimination Claims

Warner Norcross + Judd on

On June 5, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services that courts cannot apply a heightened evidentiary standard to majority-group plaintiffs when deciding discrimination claims. The...more

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

SCOTUS Rejects Heightened Standard for Title VII Majority Group

In Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Servs., No. 23-1039, 2025 WL 1583264, (U.S. June 5, 2025), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that majority group plaintiffs (in this instance, a heterosexual plaintiff) do not need to meet...more

Fisher Phillips

Congress Considers AI Whistleblower Law: What Employers Need to Know Now

Fisher Phillips on

A bipartisan bill pending before Congress would make it illegal to retaliate against employees who speak up about AI-related risks. Senators from both sides of the aisle introduced the AI Whistleblower Protection Act (S....more

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

How Courts are Applying the “Some Harm” Standard Since Muldrow

More than a year has passed since the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in its April 2024 decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, 601 U.S. 346, 144 S. Ct. 967, 218 L. Ed. 2d 322 (2024) that employees need only...more

Gray Reed

Supreme Court Increases Potential Employer Liability Under Title VII’s Discrimination Provisions

Gray Reed on

On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, resolving a long-standing split among federal courts and clarifying the evidentiary standard for Title...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

SCOTUS Clarifies Standard for Evaluating “Reverse” Discrimination

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States resolved the split among federal circuits and held that the same standard used to evaluate claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies to all...more

Franczek P.C.

Supreme Court Rules Anti-Discrimination Protections Apply Equally to All

Franczek P.C. on

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court held that a plaintiff who is a member of a majority group does not need to meet a more stringent burden of proof in order to prove unlawful employment discrimination under Title VII of the...more

CDF Labor Law LLP

Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects Heightened Burden for Majority-Group Plaintiffs in Title VII Claims

CDF Labor Law LLP on

On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, rejecting a longstanding rule applied by the Sixth Circuit and other circuit courts that imposed a...more

Miller Canfield

No More Extra Hurdles: Court Strikes Down Title VII Bias Rule

Miller Canfield on

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating against any individual based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. But does that protection apply equally to white, male, or...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Pennsylvania Medical Marijuana Card-Holder Survives Employer’s Motion to Dismiss

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

A recent opinion from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania serves a win to a medical marijuana card-holder who brought claims against an employer under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the Pennsylvania Medical...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

Three decisions provide cautions for employers who do business in the Bay State

Three recent court decisions provide important reminders for businesses with employees in Massachusetts. One involves application of the Massachusetts Wage Act to remote workers; one clarifies potential liability for...more

Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL

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

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

194 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 8

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide