ERGs: Valuable or Vulnerable?
How to Balance Diverse Views in the Office
Strengthening Your Hiring Process
Non-Disparagement Tips for Employers
From Forest to Fortune: Navigating Workplace Ethics With Robin Hood — Hiring to Firing Podcast
Mid-Year Labor & Employment Law Update: Key Developments and Compliance Strategies
Disparate Impact & Enforcement Rollbacks: What’s the Tea in L&E?
NLRB Quorum Limbo, DOL Deregulation Push, Coldplay Concert Exposes Workplace Romance - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Non-Compete Compliance in 2025: State Trends and Employer Strategies
Off the Clock, On the Radar: Managing Off-Duty Conduct and Workplace Impact
New Virginia "Workplace Violence" Definition and Healthcare Reporting Law: What's the Tea in L&E?
Blowing the Whistle: What Employers Should Know About DEI & the False Claims Act
(Podcast) California Employment News: Creating the Report for a Workplace Investigation – Part 4 (Featured)
Essential Steps to Sell Your Business
Multijurisdictional Employers, P2: 2025 State-by-State Updates on Non-Compete/Non-Solicitation Agts
Is the Four-Day Workweek Really a Benefit? What’s the Tea in L&E?
Workplace Risks Meet Holistic Legal Solutions: One-on-One with Adam Tomiak
Constangy Clips Ep. 11 - Summer Interns and Short-Term Workers: 3 Tips for Managing Seasonal Hires
California Employment News: Synthesizing Evidence in a Workplace Investigation – Part 3 (Featured)
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services that reverse discrimination claims are no longer subject to different rules. This decision alters the landscape...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
The closely watched battle over “reverse discrimination” claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 concluded Wednesday with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. The...more
The U.S. Supreme Court set the record straight on June 5, 2025 — reminding employers that all employees are created equal when it comes to Title VII litigation in federal court. The decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of...more
A pair of cases from the United States Supreme Court and the Second Circuit (covering Connecticut, New York, and Vermont) in 2024 highlight the importance of documentation and well-trained managers when issuing employee...more
In the first days of his presidency, President Donald J. Trump made significant changes to the makeup and priorities of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). On the second day of his administration, President...more
Earlier this month, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (which includes North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia) vacated the district court’s grant of summary judgment for the employer in Wannamaker-Amos v. Purem Novi...more
Settles Federal Suit Company Refused to Hire Women for Driver and Warehouse Positions - MIAMI – Kane’s Furniture, LLC, a Florida-based furniture retail company, will pay $1,482,748.00 in monetary relief and provide...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In June 2024, Seyfarth published a blog article warning construction industry employers of recent anti-harassment guidelines issued by the EEOC. We predicted that the EEOC has “put the construction...more
This Littler Lightbulb highlights some of the more significant employment law developments at the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeal in the last month....more
When transferring an employee or making changes to their job duties, employers now face an increased risk of claims under Title VII. On April 17, the US Supreme Court unanimously held that plaintiffs alleging discrimination...more
The Supreme Court made it easier for claimants to assert discrimination claims under Title VII in its April 17 ruling in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, et al. Previously, courts required a plaintiff to show that a workplace...more
On April 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously lowered the burden applicable to discriminatory transfer claims brought under Title VII. According to the Court, a showing of some harm—rather than significant or some...more
SCOTUS announces ‘some harm’ standard for Title VII claims based on a mandatory job transfer. The Supreme Court in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, et al., 601 U.S. ____ (April 17, 2024), held that where an...more
The Court's decision in Muldrow v. St. Louis requires plaintiffs to prove "some injury" respecting employment terms or conditions in discrimination cases....more
On April 17, 2024, in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, the Supreme Court of the United States held that an employer may violate Title VII’s anti-discrimination provisions when it transfers an employee even if the transfer did...more
On Wednesday, April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court provided an opening for workers to allege employment discrimination claims regarding job transfers based on sex, race, religion, or national origin. In Muldrow v....more
In Nelson v. Goodberry Restaurant Group Ltd. dba Buono Osteria and others, 2021 BCHRT 137, the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal found that a restaurant and its managers that refused to use a server’s pronouns, among...more
A federal appeals court has made it easier for plaintiffs to bring employment discrimination lawsuits, but failed to offer clear guidance on how employers can adjust policies to minimize litigation risk. The en banc...more
On August 18, 2023, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which holds jurisdiction over Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi, abandoned a decades-old interpretation that discrimination must be related to an “ultimate employment...more
The Supreme Court’s blockbuster decisions last term dominated the headlines – and many rulings will have a lasting impact on employer practices. The Justices continued to shape the workplace law landscape by ruling on an...more
In A.B. v. C.D., 2022 HRTO 890, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) found that the applicant was a victim of discrimination on the basis of sex and that her work environment was poisoned by repeated acts of...more
In another chapter in litigation alliteration, in Maner v. Dignity Health, f/k/a Catholic Healthcare West, the Ninth Circuit held that a male employee’s theory that his supervisor’s long-term romantic relationship with a...more
You may have heard of “Bring Your Child to Work Day,” but have you ever heard of “Bring Your Baby to Work Every Day”? Many of you likely just scoffed at the idea. Simply put, a baby cannot be an employee so therefore they...more
California Governor Gavin Newsom recently signed into law 15 bills designed to provide greater employee protections in California. Among those bills were Assembly Bill 9 (“AB 9”) and Assembly Bill 51 (“AB 51”), both of which...more