News & Analysis as of

Title VII › Adverse Employment Action

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a United States federal law enacted in 1964 and aimed at preventing discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion. Title VII... more +
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is a United States federal law enacted in 1964 and aimed at preventing discrimination in the workplace on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, and religion. Title VII has been subsequently extended to discrimination on the basis of pregnancy and sexual stereotypes and to prohibit sexual harassment. Title VII applies to all employers with fifteen or more employees including private employers, state and local governments, and educational institutions.  less -
Poyner Spruill LLP

Why Comparator Analysis Matters: A Key Fourth Circuit Ruling

Poyner Spruill LLP on

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

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP

The Coldplay Concert Kiss Cam Scandal: Legal and Employment Litigation Implications

Kohrman Jackson & Krantz LLP on

We’ve all heard about and been astonished (or entertained) by the recent Coldplay concert kiss cam scandal involving the CEO and Chief People Officer of Astronomer, a data infrastructure and workflow company valued at over $1...more

Gould + Ratner LLP

Coldplay Gate: What if It Happened at Your Company?

Gould + Ratner LLP on

The internet lit up recently with viral footage from a “kiss cam” at a Coldplay concert in Boston, Massachusetts. The clip, now dubbed by some as “Coldplay Gate,” depicts the married CEO of Astronomer, Inc., having an...more

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

Recent Settlement Latest in Developing Trend in Reverse Discrimination Cases

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP on

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

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

Warner Norcross + Judd

Supreme Court Rejects Heightened Evidentiary Standard for Majority-Group Plaintiffs in Title VII Discrimination Claims

Warner Norcross + Judd on

On June 5, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services that courts cannot apply a heightened evidentiary standard to majority-group plaintiffs when deciding discrimination claims. The...more

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

SCOTUS Rejects Heightened Standard for Title VII Majority Group

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC on

In Ames v. Ohio Dep’t of Youth Servs., No. 23-1039, 2025 WL 1583264, (U.S. June 5, 2025), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that majority group plaintiffs (in this instance, a heterosexual plaintiff) do not need to meet...more

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC

How Courts are Applying the “Some Harm” Standard Since Muldrow

Harris Beach Murtha PLLC on

More than a year has passed since the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in its April 2024 decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, 601 U.S. 346, 144 S. Ct. 967, 218 L. Ed. 2d 322 (2024) that employees need only...more

Gray Reed

Supreme Court Increases Potential Employer Liability Under Title VII’s Discrimination Provisions

Gray Reed on

On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, resolving a long-standing split among federal courts and clarifying the evidentiary standard for Title...more

McDermott Will & Emery

SCOTUS Clarifies Standard for Evaluating “Reverse” Discrimination

McDermott Will & Emery 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

Franczek P.C.

Supreme Court Rules Anti-Discrimination Protections Apply Equally to All

Franczek P.C. on

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court held that a plaintiff who is a member of a majority group does not need to meet a more stringent burden of proof in order to prove unlawful employment discrimination under Title VII of the...more

CDF Labor Law LLP

Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects Heightened Burden for Majority-Group Plaintiffs in Title VII Claims

CDF Labor Law LLP on

On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, rejecting a longstanding rule applied by the Sixth Circuit and other circuit courts that imposed a...more

Miller Canfield

No More Extra Hurdles: Court Strikes Down Title VII Bias Rule

Miller Canfield on

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating against any individual based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. But does that protection apply equally to white, male, or...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

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

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Time Was Not on Her Side: 5th Circuit Rules Unpaid Mentor’s Claim of Discrimination Is Untimely

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

In Title VII actions, plaintiffs have a limited amount of time to file a charge of discrimination (or a court can dismiss the case as untimely). In the case of Wells v. Texas Tech University, the timeliness dynamic was...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Top Five: The Biggest Labor & Employment Developments from 2024

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC on

As we close out 2024 and look to 2025, I polled members of Spilman, myself included, to get their take on some of the biggest labor and employment developments from 2024 that have or will impact employers. You can find more...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

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP

SCOTUS Takes Up Another Case With DEI Implications

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP on

Last week, the Supreme Court accepted review of Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. The court will address a circuit split regarding the standard courts apply in discrimination claims brought by majority group...more

FordHarrison

How Courts Have Analyzed Discrimination Claims after the U.S. Supreme Court's Decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri:...

FordHarrison on

Real World Impact: In April, the Supreme Court issued a decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, lowering the standard that federal courts had applied for decades on discriminatory transfer claims under Title VII...more

Lathrop GPM

Title VII & Lateral Transfers - Treacherous Territory after United States Supreme Court Ruling

Lathrop GPM on

The United States Supreme Court recently settled a circuit split concerning when an involuntary lateral transfer may violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Court’s opinion in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Shifting Views on Paid Administrative Leave

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Employers often place employees on paid administrative leave while they investigate accusations of employee misconduct or make decisions regarding the employees’ employment. Traditionally, most federal courts agreed that this...more

Proskauer - Labor Relations Update

Sixth Circuit Sends Ohio State Graduate Student’s Employment Status Case Under Title VII to a Jury Trial

Proskauer - Labor Relations Update on

On August 28, 2024, the Sixth Circuit in Huang v. Ohio State Univ., 6th Cir., No. 23-03469 (Aug. 28, 2024) –—in a case with broader implications for the employment status of graduate students—reversed the Southern District of...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

284 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 12
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