Demystifying Wage and Hour Audits: One-on-One with Courtney McFate
New FLSA Notice Standard, DOL’s PAID Program, Axed Wage and Hour Penalties - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Nationwide FLSA Lawsuits Just Got Harder—Here’s Why - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Non-Disparagement Tips for Employers
Judge Xavier Rodriguez on Possession, Custody, or Control from the Meet and Confer Podcast
The Journey of Litigation
The Labor Law Insider: How Arbitrations Help Preserve Labor-Management Peace, Part I
Master the First Moves in Litigation for Courtroom Advantage – Speaking of Litigation Video Podcast
Workplace Risks Meet Holistic Legal Solutions: One-on-One with Adam Tomiak
The Labor Law Insider: NLRB Does a U-Turn on Make-Whole Settlement Remedies, Part II
Podcast - How Do You Define Success?
Hiring Smarter: Best Practices for Interviews: What's the Tea in L&E?
The Labor Law Insider: NLRB Does a U-Turn on Make-Whole Settlement Remedies, Part I
Handling References and Referrals While Safeguarding Your Business
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Forfeitures Under Fire
Your Guide to Dealing with Subpoenas Effectively
Navigating the Maze: eDiscovery Essentials for Employers — Hiring to Firing Podcast
Podcast - The Law as a Force for Change
Trade Secrets on Trial: Strategic Decisions for the Courtroom - Employment Law This Week® - Spilling Secrets Podcast
The Changing Landscape of EEOC Enforcement and Disparate Impact
In 2024, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, which arose out of a sex discrimination claim filed by a female police officer. Officer Muldrow was transferred to a different position within...more
Two years ago, the long dormant duty to accommodate employees’ religious beliefs and practices was awakened by the U.S. Supreme Court in Groff v. Dejoy. Gone were the days when an employer could justify the denial of a...more
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
The National Football League (NFL) is in the spotlight this season, not because of any certain game on the field, but for a legal battle off it. Last week, the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that a NFL coach...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
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
Imagine accepting a new job, signing a stack of documents, and working for years—only to learn after being fired that hidden fine print gave you just months, not years, to sue for wrongful termination. Sound fair? 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
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
Lampkin v. County of Los Angeles, 2025 WL 1874669 (Cal. Ct. App. 2025) - D’Andre Lampkin, a deputy in the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, investigated a man whom he believed was soliciting a prostitute. (In...more
In a June decision, the Supreme Court limited retirees' ability to bring Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) lawsuits, finding that the ADA generally does not allow claims by retirees or protect post-employment health...more
The New Jersey Appellate Division recently issued an important decision clarifying how claims brought under the Law Against Discrimination (LAD) interact with agency proceedings in employment matters. Specifically, it made...more
The reports of the death of Section 10 of the FAA may have been greatly exaggerated. Thursday, a majority of the Eleventh Circuit held in Nalco Co. LLC v. Bonday that an arbitration award was subject to vacatur under Section...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on April 8, 2025, clarified the scope of “marital status” discrimination under the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL). In Hunter v. Debmar-Mercury LLC, et al., the Second...more
As we have previously reported here and here, “nuclear” verdicts from California juries in employment discrimination and harassment cases have become increasingly common over the past few years. Although these massive...more
The Connecticut Appellate Court recently affirmed summary judgment in favor of a law firm employer, holding that a legal assistant’s request to work entirely remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic was not a reasonable...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
A recent case from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit offers insights on several interesting aspects of claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), including the impact of an extended delay in the...more
In this month’s highlights, our team summarises the latest developments in UK employment law and their implications for employers. 1. In Prähl and Ors v Lapinski, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (the “EAT”) upheld an...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
Retirees experiencing changes in post-employment benefits due to disability may not be able claim disability discrimination, following a recent fractured U.S. Supreme Court decision....more
Last week in a 7-2 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act does not apply to claims by a former employee that changes to her retiree medical benefits discriminated against her...more
In Stanley v. City of Sanford (June 20, 2025), the United States Supreme Court considered whether the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protects former employees against disability discrimination with respect to...more