Abortion Protections Struck Down, LGBTQ Harassment Guidance Vacated, EEO-1 Reporting Opens - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 44: Conducting Effective Workplace Investigations with Kimberly Hewitt and Antwan Lofton of Duke University
TortsCenter Podcast | Episode 8 | Gambling and Harassment: Wyoming’s Game-Changing Ban
What's the Tea in L&E? Supervisor Liability: What Managers Need To Know
What's the Tea in L&E? One Time Too Many: What is “Severe” Conduct?
What's the Tea in L&E? Truth Hurts or Rumors? Lizzo’s Harassment Allegations Serve As A Good Reminder
Bystander Responsibility in the Era of #MeToo: Lessons Learned From Apple TV’s The Morning Show - Hiring to Firing Podcast
Constangy Webinar - DEI Audits: Tools to Enhance Your DEI Practices
What Can the TV Series Succession Teach Us About Harassment? - Hiring to Firing Podcast
#WorkforceWednesday: Judge Barrett’s Employment Law Record, Arbitrator to Rule on Postmates’ Challenge, Responding to Frivolous Lawsuits - Employment Law This Week®
[WEBINAR] Labor & Employment Law: What Changed in 2017
Episode 37: How To Provide Meaningful Employment Training (…and Also Comply With NYC Law)
Employment Law This Week®: Workplace Harassment Review in Federal Courts, DOL Opinion Letters, NLRB Nomination, ICE Raids
This Week in FCPA-Episode 74
Part 1 of 2: My Sit-Down Interview With Former EEOC General Counsel David Lopez
Employment Law This Week: U.S. Supreme Court Nominee, California’s Anti-Harassment Regulations, Oregon’s Minimum Wage, Whistleblower Legislation
AB1825 Training and Anti-Harassment and Discrimination Training
Waldman: Stop Immunizing Websites That Allow Harassment
Stefan Hankin on Online Harassment
Polsinelli Podcasts - Workplace Bullying: What Employers Need to Know
Now is a good time to re-evaluate your company’s employee evaluation process in light of the prevalence of remote work and a U.S. Supreme Court decision lowering the requirements for employees to succeed on certain...more
In a win for employers, the Connecticut Supreme Court defines “supervisor” narrowly for purposes of vicarious employer liability under Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act - Under Connecticut’s civil rights law, an...more
Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, which lowered the threshold for employees to demonstrate discrimination under Title VII, the Sixth Circuit has expanded the scope of what employers...more
If an employer or coworker persistently uses a transgender worker’s wrong name or identified pronoun, can that constitute a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII? In Copeland v. Georgia Department of Corrections,...more
On April 29, 2024, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued its Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace (the “Guidance”). The Guidance sets forth the EEOC’s position on harassment that constitutes...more
Almost seven months after seeking public comment on an initial proposed version, and more than seven years after first attempting to update its guidance on the issue, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued on...more
Attacks on Non-Disclosure, Confidentiality, and Non-Compete Agreements in 2023 - On several fronts in 2023, we saw federal agencies and entities attacking the scope and enforceability of certain employment agreements,...more
The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) released proposed guidance on September 29, 2023, that explains the legal standards imposed and outlines employer liability with respect to harassment claims...more
On September 29, 2023, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the “EEOC”) released its draft guidance concerning harassment in the workplace. The updated guidance reflects notable changes in law, including the...more
This month’s key California employment law cases are from the California Supreme Court and from the California Court of Appeal. Janus v. American Fed’n of State, County, and Mun. Employees, Council 31, 138 S. Ct. 2448...more
It’s hard to keep up with all the recent changes to labor and employment law. While the law always seems to evolve at a rapid pace, there have been an unprecedented number of changes each month in 2017. November was no...more
Last week, the world mourned Cecil the Lion, and all eyes were on the Minnesota dentist who killed him. The scrutiny of the dentist unearthed, among other things, a sexual harassment complaint lodged against him by a former...more
In our June 26 alert regarding the U.S. Supreme Court's same-sex marriage decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, we said we would continue to keep you posted regarding new developments in this area of the law. Some of you may...more
Supreme Court Confirms FICA Taxes Must be Withheld from Severance Payments - Finding severance payments to be a form of “remuneration for employment,” the United States Supreme Court in United States v. Quality Stores,...more
In This Issue: - Harassment. Are your executive training programs effective? - State Round-Up. Learn about the latest employment law news in your state - Unions. Harold Coxson and Baker Wyche discuss the new...more
By the end of this year’s term, the United States Supreme Court had issued three “employer-friendly” decisions. While the decisions do not dramatically alter the employment law landscape, employers will still welcome the...more
On June 24, the Supreme Court issued two new opinions in favor of employers, both five-to-four decisions that narrowly construe the scope of Title VII’s retaliation and employer liability rules and significantly raise the bar...more
In another favorable ruling for employers, the Supreme Court in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar clarified that employees must satisfy a higher “but for” standard of proof to prevail in a Title VII...more
On June 24, 2013, the United States Supreme Court issued two employer-friendly opinions that substantially narrow potential liability for claims of supervisor misconduct and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act...more
Last month the U.S. Supreme Court adopted a bright-line standard for determining which employees qualify as supervisors in harassment lawsuits filed under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, thus resolving a split in the...more
On Monday, we blogged about the first of two recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions interpreting Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar. Today, we’ll...more
On June 24th, the Supreme Court issued two important decisions that narrow the circumstances under which employers can be held liable for retaliation or harassment claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In...more
The Supreme Court has ruled in Vance v. Ball State University that the authority to take tangible employment actions is the defining characteristic of a supervisor, and that without such authority an employee is not a...more