The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2002 Ragsdale decision rejected Department of Labor regulations stating that failure to provide employees with notice of leave rights was a per se violation of the Family and Medical Leave Act....more
The Supreme Court’s 2006 Burlington Northern decision concluded that employers engage in retaliation against protected employees when they take action that would deter a reasonable person from filing an EEOC charge or...more
5/17/2016
/ Adverse Employment Action ,
Burlington Northern ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ,
Gender Discrimination ,
Harassment ,
Remand ,
Retaliation ,
Reversal ,
Title VII
The Fair Labor Standards Act contains regulations explaining when time spent by new employees training for their jobs is compensable working time. In most circumstances, the employer must pay trainees for time spent learning...more
In last year’s Mach Mining decision, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is required to attempt to settle (“conciliate”) discrimination claims before bringing suit against...more
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (which includes North Carolina and South Carolina) is among the minority of federal appellate circuits that restricts the ability of employers and employees to release claims for unpaid...more
Plaintiffs seeking compensation for sexual harassment must demonstrate that they were subjected to a hostile and offensive working environment. Plaintiffs in same-sex harassment claims have the additional burden of proving...more
Earlier this month, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission released final statistics on charges of discrimination filed during the most recent fiscal year. The total charges rose slightly over 2014, but remained well...more
In recent years, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and federal courts across the U.S. have increasingly agreed that discrimination against transgendered employees is a form of sex discrimination under Title VII....more
The Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act (GINA) prohibits employers from asking employees questions about their family medical histories in most circumstances. However, doctors’ medical questionnaires have for decades...more
Plaintiffs can sue for employment discrimination under federal civil rights laws using two theories. Disparate treatment claims allege that the plaintiff was treated differently based on his or her protected status. Disparate...more
Some employers prefer using temporary workers due to the added flexibility they provide in terms of filling roles not suited for permanent employees. However, some employers persist in believing that obtaining workers from a...more
The Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits employers from discriminating against protected individuals with respect to terms and conditions of employment, including compensation. Employers frequently ask whether these...more
Title VII and related federal anti-discrimination laws prohibit employers from discriminating against persons based on their membership in a protected category. These discrimination prohibitions include pay disparities. What...more
Last week, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals backed the National Labor Relations Board’s position that employee social media postings are protected concerted activity under federal law, even if they use obscenities that...more
In its most recent term, the U.S. Supreme Court held in the Mach Mining case that federal courts have limited ability to review whether or not the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission fulfilled its statutory duty to...more
In recent years, more Americans have begun identifying themselves as biracial or of mixed racial heritage. This shift has resulted in changes to census and other forms where people are asked to self-identify by race. In...more
As with most states, South Carolina recognizes an exception to its general employment at-will doctrine. Employers may terminate employees with or without cause, but not for any reason that violates the state’s public policy....more
10/5/2015
/ Appeals ,
At-Will Employment ,
Breach of Contract ,
Dismissals ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Contract ,
Public Employees ,
Public Employers ,
SC Supreme Court ,
Severance Pay ,
Wrongful Termination
Employers in cities like Charlotte that straddle state lines sometimes face interesting questions about the applicability of which state’s laws to their employment decisions. An employee may live in South Carolina, commute to...more
On occasion, an employee’s medical condition may cause employers concern over that person’s ability to operate heavy machinery or otherwise to work in a hazardous environment. For example, an employee with epilepsy has...more
Employers that receive requests for accommodation made by a disabled employee must remain careful about making significant changes to that employee’s terms and conditions of employment prior to concluding review and...more
Last year, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission garnered significant criticism from employers when it sued CVS over its standard releases used in conjunction with reductions in force and similar employee terminations....more
Earlier this year in its Abercrombie decision, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that an employee suing for religious discrimination did not have to demonstrate actual knowledge of an employee’s religious practices to trigger...more
In some situations, employees taking Family and Medical Leave were on shaky grounds with regard to their continuing employment prior to the absence. The employer then moves to terminate the employee either while he remains on...more
Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act prohibits employers from discriminating or retaliating against employees who engage in protected concerted activity. Concerted Activity means actions involving terms and...more
8/17/2015
/ Class Action ,
Collective Actions ,
Discrimination ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) ,
NLRA ,
NLRB ,
Protected Concerted Activity ,
Restaurant Industry ,
Retaliation ,
Section 7 ,
Tipped Employees
Like most federal labor laws, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from retaliating against employees who oppose unlawful employment practices. However, a number of federal courts have adopted a...more