Compliance Unveiled: 10 Must-Know Tips for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act & Independent Contractor Rules
The Burr Broadcast: Key Differences Between PWFA and ADA
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Expands Title VII, EEOC’s Final PWFA Rule, AI Screening Tools - Employment Law This Week®
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 13: The Americans with Disabilities Act with Stefania Bondurant
The Burr Morning Show: Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 3: Top Labor & Employment Issues for 2024 with Jennie Cluverius, Cherie Blackburn, and Christy Rogers
Workplace Accommodation after COVID: Legal Update
Podcast: What Employers Should Know about the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act [More with McGlinchey, Ep. 62]
Employment Law Now VII-136 - Summer 2023 Wrap-Up Part 2
The Burr Broadcast Aug. 2023: Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
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®
Litigation Lessons for California Employers
DE Under 3: Diving into DEAMcon23 – Accommodations, DEIB, Disability & More
Constangy Webinar - Spring Cleaning: How to Keep your HR Practices Mess Free
Employment Law Now VII-130- An Interview With EEOC Commissioner (Vice Chair) Jocelyn Samuels
The Burr Morning Show April 2023 - The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
#WorkforceWednesday: Federal Focus on Mental Health, FTC and Noncompetes, Gig Work Risks for Hospitals - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law Now VI-116-Top 10 Employment Issues To Consider For The Summer Kick-Off
Federal Lawsuit Says Manufacturer Failed to Allow Any Exceptions to Vaccination Policy - TULSA, Okla. – AG Equipment Company, a Broken Arrow, Oklahoma compressor packaging manufacturer, violated federal law when it fired...more
Settles Federal Charges Nationwide Furniture Retailer Failed to Accommodate an Employee’s Sincerely Held Religious Beliefs and Terminated Her - MOBILE, Ala. – Hank’s Furniture, Inc. (HFI), a nationwide furniture retailer,...more
How should an employer react if an employee claims that mandatory anti-discrimination training conflicts with the employee’s religious beliefs? Two recent EEOC decisions shed some light on this question. In both cases, the...more
EEOC Investigation Finds Clinic Refused to Provide Reasonable Accommodation and Discharged Employee Because of Religious Beliefs - SEATTLE – Passages Family Support, a non-profit organization with a clinic in Spokane,...more
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers with 15 or more employees from discriminating against employees and applicants on the basis of religion (as well as race, color, sex, and national origin), and it...more
In Part One of this two-part bulletin, we explored the expansive meaning of religious beliefs entitled to an accommodation under Title VII and the reluctance of courts to second guess whether a belief is “religious” in...more
Consider this: an employee refuses to accept Sunday shifts because, under his religion, that day is devoted to worship and rest. Is his employer legally required to accommodate him? For decades, the answer was easy....more
In the Public Interest is excited to continue our miniseries examining landmark decisions recently issued by the United States Supreme Court. The fourth episode examines the Court’s decision in Groff v. DeJoy, a case centered...more
The U.S Supreme Court issued an opinion in Groff v. DeJoy redefining an employer’s obligations for religious accommodations under Title VII. The Court strayed away from the almost five-decade standard previously used and...more
On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down its unanimous decision in Groff v. DeJoy, which heightened the burden that employers bear in proving that an employee’s request for a religious...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has “clarified” the test under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act that employers and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission have relied upon for more than 46 years, making it easier for...more
Employers evaluating religious accommodations under Title VII are now required to strike a new balance due to the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent clarification of what constitutes an “undue hardship.” Employers should promptly...more
On June 29, 2023, the US Supreme Court issued a decision clarifying the standard employers must apply in considering an employee’s religious accommodation request under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. In Groff v. DeJoy,...more
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex and national origin, requires employers with 15 or more employees to accommodate the sincerely held...more
On June 29, 2023, amid a flurry of other newsworthy opinions, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling in Groff v. DeJoy, modifying the legal standard which courts now must use to determine when an employer has to grant a...more
The Supreme Court’s decision in Groff v. Dejoy is a consequential case for employers facing religious accommodation requests. The Court held that an employer facing such requests does not need to follow the “undue hardship”...more
On June 29, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Groff v. DeJoy that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires an employer that denies a religious accommodation to show that the burden of granting an...more
In Groff v. De Joy, Post Master General, No. 22-174 (June 29, 2023), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously upended decades-old precedent that set the standard for undue hardship in the context of an employee's request for a...more
On June 29, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court abrogated the de minimis standard that many lower courts have applied for decades to determine when Title VII permits employers to refuse an employee’s request for religious...more
How much burden must a company demonstrate before it is relieved of the obligation to accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs in the workplace under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? On June 29, 2023, the Supreme...more
In Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, 432 U.S. 63 (1977), the U.S. Supreme Court held that “[t]o require [an employer] to bear more than a de minimis cost in order to” grant an employee a religious accommodation under...more
In a striking break from its recent steady stream of divided opinions, last week the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion making a dramatic change in the level of hardship an employer must show to justify...more
On June 29, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Groff v. DeJoy, marking a significant shift in religious accommodation law and shaping how employers are required to accommodate employees' sincerely held...more
The Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Groff v. DeJoy has curtailed an employer’s ability to demonstrate an “undue hardship” when assessing an employee’s request for a religious accommodation under Title VII of the Civil...more
On June 29, 2023, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Groff v. Dejoy, in which the Court announced a heightened standard for employers attempting to demonstrate that an employee’s request for religious...more