News & Analysis as of

Hiring & Firing › Adverse Employment Action › Employment Discrimination

Hiring & Firing refers to the process of recruiting, interviewing and offering employment and the process of evaluating performance and dismissing employees. Hiring & Firing is a highly regulated area and... more +
Hiring & Firing refers to the process of recruiting, interviewing and offering employment and the process of evaluating performance and dismissing employees. Hiring & Firing is a highly regulated area and can create tremendous liability for employers who fail to properly adhere to acceptable employment practices. Some of the potential pitfalls in this area stem from discriminatory hiring practices, improper performance evaluations, and retaliatory firings.  less -
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

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

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

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

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

McDermott Will & Schulte

SCOTUS Clarifies Standard for Evaluating “Reverse” Discrimination

McDermott Will & Schulte on

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

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

Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL

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

Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL on

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

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Washington’s Fair Chance Act: New Amendments Transform Employer Background Check Policies

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In 2018, Washington enacted a Fair Chance Act, requiring covered employers to wait until after considering an applicant to be “otherwise qualified” for the position at issue to inquire about or consider criminal history when...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

More Arrested Developments: Wisconsin Supreme Court Holds ‘Arrest Record’ Encompasses Noncriminal Civil Violations

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on

The Supreme Court of Wisconsin recently provided significant guidance resolving uncertainty about the scope of the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act’s (WFEA) prohibition against discrimination based on an employee’s or...more

Woods Rogers

A Retaliation Refresher: What's the Tea in L&E?

Woods Rogers on

In this episode of What’s the Tea in L&E, Labor & Employment attorney Mike Gardner joins host Leah Stiegler to unpack the topic of workplace retaliation. Retaliation occurs when an employee faces negative consequences because...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

Can you take action against an employee for being a pain in the you-know-what?

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP on

At least one court says yes. True confession: When I was a little future lawyer, I was sometimes a pain. (So, Robin, you’re saying your personality hasn't changed in all these years?) When I was being especially “high...more

Conn Maciel Carey LLP

[Webinar] The Latest in Employment Discrimination Laws - December 12th, 1:00 pm EST

Conn Maciel Carey LLP on

Employment discrimination in the workplace is alive and well. Indeed, according to Monster’s recent Workplace Discrimination Poll, only 9% of workers claim to have NOT faced some form of workplace discrimination. There have...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

San Diego County Joins California Jurisdictions With Fair Chance Ordinances

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: Since 2018, California has had a comprehensive Fair Chance Act (CFCA), which places a number of restrictions on employers using criminal history for hiring and other employment purposes. San Francisco and...more

Littler

San Diego County Adds a New Layer to California’s Complex Web of Laws Regulating the Use of Criminal Records in the Hiring Process

Littler on

California state law already saddles private sector employers with significant obligations to job applicants with a criminal record. Various local laws layer on top of these obligations to make compliance even more...more

PilieroMazza PLLC

Supreme Court Opens Door to Broader Spectrum of Employment Discrimination Cases

PilieroMazza PLLC on

In April 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court held that transferring an employee to a new position with the same rank and pay may constitute an adverse action under Title VII. The recent decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis,...more

Fisher Phillips

SCOTUS 2023/24 Lookback and Preview: 8 Key Rulings that Impact the Workplace and 4 New Cases for Employers to Track Next Term

Fisher Phillips on

The Supreme Court issued several momentous decisions last term that will have a lasting impact on employer practices. The Justices continued to shape the workplace law landscape by ruling on an array of issues involving...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Supreme Court Lowers the Bar for Title VII Employment Claims

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act requires employees alleging employment discrimination to show they suffered an adverse employment action as a result of their membership in a protected class....more

Polsinelli

No Harm, No Foul: The Supreme Court Reduces “Harm” Standard for Discriminatory Job Transfer Claims under Title VII

Polsinelli on

In April, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, that to sustain a prima facie case of employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), plaintiffs do...more

Conn Maciel Carey LLP

Employers Beware: Title VII Now Allows Employees to More Easily Challenge Your Decision to Transfer or Reassign Them

Conn Maciel Carey LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, a case involving a St. Louis Police Department officer’s claim that she was subject to a discriminatory job...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

No More Adjectives… Just Some Harm: Supreme Rules on Title VII Job Transfer Threshold

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

If you transfer an employee to a job with no loss in pay or title but the employee thinks it is less desirable, can that employee sue you for discrimination under Title VII? While it depends on the facts, in Muldrow v. St....more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

The U.S. Supreme Court Lowers the Standard for an Employee to Prove Workplace Discrimination from an Involuntary Job Transfer

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC on

On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued its unanimous decision in Muldrow v. St. Louis, 601 U.S. _____ (2024), which addressed the appropriate standard for evaluating whether a job transfer – even where the...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

U.S. Supreme Court: Alleging Discriminatory Transfer Is Sufficient Harm to Bring Title VII Claim

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

An employee challenging a job transfer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act must show the transfer brought about some harm with respect to an identifiable term or condition of employment, but that harm need not be...more

Vinson & Elkins LLP

Lowering the Bar: Unlawful Discrimination Can Exist Absent a Showing of “Significant” or “Serious” Harm

Vinson & Elkins LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court in Muldrow v. St. Louis held that an employee who claimed she was involuntarily transferred to another position because of her sex in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of...more

Miller & Martin PLLC

The Supreme Court’s “Some Harm” Definition Leaves SomeTHING to be Desired in Discrimination Cases Involving Workplace Transfers

Miller & Martin PLLC on

One of the decisions avid Supreme Court watchers (yes, aka employment law nerds) have been waiting for was Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri....more

Paul Hastings LLP

SCOTUS Removes ‘Significant Harm’ Requirement for Title VII Transfer Suits

Paul Hastings LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court decided Muldrow v. St. Louis, No. 22‑193, holding that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discriminatory job transfers that cause “some harm” with respect to the terms,...more

80 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 4
Next »

"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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide