#WorkforceWednesday®: New DOL Leadership, NLRB Quorum, EEOC Enforcement Priorities - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday®: How Will Trump’s Federal Changes Impact Employers? - Employment Law This Week®
Building Bridges – Rev. Al Sharpton’s Blueprint for Harlem’s Museum of Civil Rights
#WorkforceWednesday® - Key SCOTUS Decisions This Term for Employers - Employment Law This Week®
Webinar: Is Your DEI Policy Setting You Up for a Lawsuit?
DE Under 3: Title VII Prohibits Discriminatory Job Transfers Even Without Significant Harm, U.S. Supreme Court Unanimously Ruled
DE Under 3: EEOC Consent Decree Illustrated Enforcement Stance Regarding Natural Hair Texture & Race Discrimination
The Burr Broadcast: EEOC Strategic Enforcement Plan
#WorkforceWednesday: EEOC Enforcement Plan, California Expands Paid Sick Leave, and Strikes Across the Country - Employment Law This Week®
DE Under 3: U.S. EEOC Announced Year-End Litigation Round-Up for Fiscal Year 2023
#WorkforceWednesday: The Ripple Effect of the Supreme Court’s SFFA Ruling for Diversity in the Workplace - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law Now VII-134-Panel Discussion on Supreme Court's Affirmative Action Ruling and the Impact on Employer DEI Programs
DE Under 3: Title VII Actionable Adverse Employment Actions Not Limited to Only “Ultimate” Employment Decisions
Supreme Court Miniseries: Religious Accommodation at Work
Employment Law Now VII-133 - Hot Summer Employment Law Developments
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Introduces Heightened Standard for Religious Accommodation, Rules Against Affirmative Action, Protects “Expressive” Services - Employment Law This Week®
Business Better Podcast Episode: Is DEI at Risk? Considerations on the US Supreme Court Ruling Against Affirmative Action Programs
DE Under 3: New Controversial Proposed Rule Affecting Title VII
#WorkforceWednesday: EEOC's LGBTQ+ Guidance Blocked, Employer COVID-19 Update, NYC Prepares for Pay Transparency Law - Employment Law This Week®
Burr Broadcast September 20, 2022
The concept of adverse impact under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (Title VII) is widely misunderstood. Adverse impact occurs when a seemingly neutral employment practice disproportionately (i.e. statistically) screens out...more
On March 19, 2025, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued two technical assistance guidance documents (found here and here) focused on educating “the public about how well-established civil rights...more
On February 26, 2025, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, which is a case that will determine whether a plaintiff bringing a so-called reverse discrimination claim (where, for...more
The Supreme Court is likely to soon rule that majority-group plaintiffs must meet the same pre-trial evidentiary burden applicable to minority-group plaintiffs – and nothing more – in workplace discrimination claims under...more
Since 1973, federal courts reviewing claims of employment discrimination have used a framework first established by the U.S. Supreme Court’s McDonnell Douglas decision. Under this framework, plaintiffs must show a prima facie...more
On February 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a case that could alter the legal landscape for employment discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil...more
On February 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Ames v. OH Dept. of Youth Services, which questioned whether the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals correctly decided that a heterosexual plaintiff should have...more
On February 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. This case that could significantly impact the standards for proving employment discrimination claims under Title...more
Just as employers are reconsidering their approach to DEI and the myriad of potential risks such policies could present under current administration enforcement priorities, the Supreme Court recently heard arguments in a case...more
In a recent oral argument, the Justices seemed largely aligned with the plaintiff’s position that majority and historically disadvantaged groups should face the same prima facie test under Title VII....more
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, an employment discrimination lawsuit that focused on a reverse discrimination claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act...more
On February 26, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a case involving the appropriate standard for plaintiffs in a “reverse” discrimination case. Marlean Ames sued the...more
The Supreme Court of the United States recently heard oral arguments in a case to determine whether employees who are part of a majority group must meet a higher standard to prove discrimination....more
On February 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a case that challenges the heightened evidentiary burden imposed on majority-group plaintiffs in Title VII...more
On February 26, 2025, the United States Supreme Court entertained oral argument in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a case that centered on whether a plaintiff who is a member of a majority group must meet a higher...more
On February 26, 2025, the Supreme Court and all three counsel appearing before it in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, appeared to walk away in “radical agreement” — as noted by Justice Neil Gorsuch — that a...more
Yesterday was a day of unanimity at the U.S. Supreme Court, and what the Justices were unanimous about was a textually literal approach to applying dictionary definitions to resolve statutory disputes....more
On February 5, 2025, the U.S. Attorney General (“AG”) Pam Bondi issued a memorandum to all Justice Department employees titled “Ending Illegal DEI and DEIA Discrimination and Preferences,” outlining the Department of...more
President Trump's orders targeting "woke gender ideology" do not change existing employment protections for LGBTQ employees, though threats to federal funding remain ambiguous. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and many...more
In an important opinion for employers defending against misclassification claims, the Supreme Court has issued its first major employment law decision of the current term in EMD Sales v. Carrera, with two other marquee...more
On February 5, 2025, newly confirmed U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi issued a memo to all U.S. Department of Justice Departments targeting private employers’ use of DEI initiatives. The memo is titled “Ending Illegal DEI and...more
The U.S. Attorney General's Office issued a Memorandum, on February 5, 2025, to the employees of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) directing the DOJ Civil Rights Division to "investigate, eliminate, and penalize illegal...more
After the case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, on January 30 a federal district court denied dueling motions for summary judgment filed by Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, the U.S. Postal Service, and former Postal...more
Recently confirmed U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi sent a slew of memos to Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys laying out new DOJ policies and priorities on Wednesday evening. Among them is a memo targeting diversity,...more
On February 5, 2025, the newly sworn U.S. Attorney General, Pamela Bondi, issued a Memorandum to U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Employees entitled “Ending Illegal DEI and DEIA Discrimination and Preferences.”...more