Podcast - Ruling: Las mujeres toman cerveza a los 18 años
DE Under 3: EEOC & DOJ Technical Guidance for Employer’s AI Use; Upcoming EEOC Hearing; Event for Mental Health in the Workplace
Episode 24: Corporate Oppression Doctrine Meets Sex Discrimination: A Conversation with Professor Meredith Miller
College Esports Programs: What You Need To Know
Framing the American Past to Better Understand Women and Gender History with UC Davis Professors Ellen Hartigan -O’Conner and Lisa Materson: On Record PR
#WorkforceWednesday: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Leaves Behind a Legacy - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Decision on LGBTQ Employees, EEOC on Older Workers Returning to Work - Employment Law This Week®
This Week in FCPA-Episode 142 - the What’s in Your Supply Chain? edition
Investigating Harassment Claims
Episode 25: EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum Part II: Other Emerging EEOC Trends + Takeaways
Episode 24: EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum Part I: Employers' "Superstar Harassment" Problem
I-12: Update on the DOL's New OT Rules, and Part 2 of My Interview with Former EEOC General Counsel David Lopez
Part 1 of 2: My Sit-Down Interview With Former EEOC General Counsel David Lopez
Stealth Lawyer: Clare Dalton, Acupuncturist
This week we summarise three very recent developments in employment law, one involving the Employment Rights Bill (ERB) and two new cases....more
On the issue of gender-affirming care, how would a Harris-Walz administration affect clients in your practice? Bottom line: A Harris-Walz administration would likely provide health plans and health plan sponsors with...more
Diversity, equity, and inclusion programs are facing scrutiny across the country, causing some employers to scale down their DEI initiatives or drop them altogether. As companies face pressure and increasing legal challenges,...more
Social media posts made by a coworker off-hours and off-site may still support a Title VII claim against an employer, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court has ruled. Lindsay Okonowsky was a staff psychologist at the Bureau of...more
The First Amendment traditionally offers robust protections for expressive employers, such as those in the entertainment and media industries, allowing them to control casting and messaging. In California, however, these...more
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
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
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
In its 2020 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits covered employers from discriminating against employees based on their...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In the Woodward case, Justice Sisitsky of the Massachusetts Superior Court issued an outright win for employers in the first decision to apply the affirmative defense of the Massachusetts Equal Pay Act...more
On July 25, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected the notion that harassing conduct must occur inside the workplace to be considered actionable. The court also affirmed the notion that “the totality...more
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
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
On April 29, 2024, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued its new Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace (the Guidance), the first update to its Guidance in over 20 years. Among the many...more
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
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
Executive Summary - In January, the Eleventh Circuit issued a decision that likely will impact employers’ litigation strategies in discrimination cases. In Tynes v. Florida Department of Juvenile Justice, the court...more
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has issued final regulations on the nondiscrimination rules set forth in Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act. The new rules apply to certain group health plans, as...more
Thus far, 2024 has been a whirlwind of new employment rules, statutes, guidance, and decisions for employers to grapple with and account for in their businesses. Among these decisions are a handful of rulings from the Supreme...more
A federal appeals court recently held that an employer’s health insurance plan wrongly excluded coverage for gender-affirming care in violation of federal civil rights law – offering a warning to employers across the country...more
In a recent decision, Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified the standard for determining whether an adverse employment action is a sufficient basis for a discrimination claim under Title VII of the...more
This Littler Lightbulb highlights some of the more significant employment law developments in the federal courts of appeal in the last month. Seventh Circuit Finds EEOC Failed to Prove Racial Harassment in Multi-Employee...more
It is generally understood, or at least it has been in the past, that plaintiffs prefer to avoid the application of the Federal Arbitration Act (the “FAA”) and instead present their cases to juries. As such, plaintiffs have...more
Under the recent Supreme Court Ruling of Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, employees no longer need to suffer “significant” harm to state a claim of discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”)....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