Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Reverse Discrimination in the Workplace with Jennie Cluverius and Fay Edwards of Maynard Nexsen
New DOJ Memo Warns Employers: Rethink DEI Programs Now - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Disparate Impact & Enforcement Rollbacks: What’s the Tea in L&E?
Blowing the Whistle: What Employers Should Know About DEI & the False Claims Act
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 48: Opportunities & Risks with Artificial Intelligence in HR with Chingwei Shieh of GE Power
DOL Restructures: OFCCP on the Chopping Block as Opinion Letters Expand - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
California Employment News: Gathering Information in a Workplace Investigation – Part 2 (Featured)
Employees Who Contradict The Company's Mission: What's the Tea in L&E?
Abortion Protections Struck Down, LGBTQ Harassment Guidance Vacated, EEO-1 Reporting Opens - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Law Firm ERGs Under Scrutiny: Navigating Compliance, Risk, and Culture - On Record PR
(Podcast) California Employment News: Starting a Workplace Investigation – Part 1 (Featured)
California Employment News: Starting a Workplace Investigation – Part 1 (Featured)
New Executive Order Targets Disparate Impact Claims Nationwide - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
The Changing Landscape of EEOC Enforcement and Disparate Impact
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 44: Conducting Effective Workplace Investigations with Kimberly Hewitt and Antwan Lofton of Duke University
The Evolution of Equal Pay: Lessons From 9 to 5 — Hiring to Firing Podcast
A Retaliation Refresher: What's the Tea in L&E?
California Employment News: Fair Chance Act – A Brief Overview of Employment Criminal Background Checks
AI in Employment: Navigating the Legal Landscape with Lessons from I, Robot — The Good Bot Podcast
Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) Update
When is an employer legally responsible for harassment of its employee by one of its customers? A recent court decision may be a relief for employers in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee. Most courts ruling on the...more
In Bivens v. Zep, Inc., No. 24-2109 (6th Cir. Aug. 8, 2025), the Sixth Circuit split with the EEOC and most U.S. Courts of Appeals as to when an employer may be liable under Title VII for harassment by a non-agent (e.g.,...more
An employee tells you a customer just harassed them — what should you do? In Bivens v. Zep, Inc. the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals charts its own course in addressing employer liability for third-party harassment. The Equal...more
Most employers understand their obligation to prevent discrimination and harassment at work, and the significant consequences that can come if such treatment is allowed to occur. But what if an employee alleges harassment not...more
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
Since vaccines became available in response to COVID-19, courts have dealt with an onslaught of litigation involving religious accommodation in the workplace. Most recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit...more
Workplace investigations are generally conducted outside of a litigation context and involve complaints that are not ultimately litigated. However, inevitably some workplace disputes that are investigated do make it to...more
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
For years, both the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and multiple federal appellate circuits have agreed on the legal standard for proving liability for sexual or other harassment by a third party such as a vendor or...more
Filing a charge of employment discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) can be confusing when determining who the employer is. That’s especially true in a complex corporate environment, where...more
In an explicit departure from EEOC guidance and other federal court caselaw, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently held that an employer can only be liable for a client/customer’s harassment of its...more
Are the days numbered for the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) ability to permit plaintiffs to eschew the administrative process by issuing Notice of Right to Sue letters “on request” prior to 180 days?...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
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
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 U.S. Supreme Court has issued a unanimous opinion holding that Title VII does not impose a heightened or different burden of proof for majority-group plaintiffs. Simply put, “reverse discrimination” Title VII claims...more
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
On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court decided Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services and held that a "majority group" plaintiff in a Title VII case need not satisfy a heightened evidentiary burden to establish a prima-facie...more
"Reverse discrimination," ADA, religion, and nationwide injunctions. The 2024-25 term of the U.S. Supreme Court is over. Two decisions at the end of the term directly addressed employment law issues, and two others will have...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
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
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
The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held on June 5, 2025, that majority group plaintiffs are not required to meet a heightened evidentiary standard of showing “background circumstances” to establish a prima facie case of...more
The United States Supreme Court on June 5, 2025, in a rare unanimous decision, overturned a decision from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals that required a plaintiff, a heterosexual, to have evidence as part of her proofs to...more
On June 5, 2025, in a unanimous and highly anticipated decision, the U.S. Supreme Court in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, No. 23-1039, clarified a critical point in employment law: all employees—regardless of...more