News & Analysis as of

Title VII Discrimination Civil Rights Act

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 -
Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

The man who said "no" to DEI training, and four lessons for employers

Employer's DEI mandate scores a win. A white guy refused to take his employer's mandatory "unconscious bias" training, and he was fired. He sued the employer for retaliation, his lawsuit was dismissed, and this week an...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Supreme Court Lowers the Bar for Title VII Employment Claims

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

Conn Maciel Carey LLP

Employers Beware: Title VII Now Allows Employees to More Easily Challenge Your Decision to Transfer or Reassign Them

Conn Maciel Carey LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, a case involving a St. Louis Police Department officer’s claim that she was subject to a discriminatory job...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Navigating the Rock & the Hard Place: Conflicting Federal and State Mandates for LGBTQ Employees

Foley & Lardner LLP on

“The rock and the hard place.” How often do employers find themselves here? If employers have LGBTQ employees in certain states, they are now bumping up against the “rock” of federal laws, like Title VII and Title IX, and the...more

Jaburg Wilk

US Supreme Court Lowers the Threshold Harm Required for Employees to Maintain Title VII Discrimination Claims

Jaburg Wilk on

In a recent decision, the United States Supreme Court held that an employee need only show “some harm” to maintain a Title VII discrimination claim against an employer for a lateral job transfer. Background - After nine...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

No More Adjectives… Just Some Harm: Supreme Rules on Title VII Job Transfer Threshold

If you transfer an employee to a job with no loss in pay or title but the employee thinks it is less desirable, can that employee sue you for discrimination under Title VII? While it depends on the facts, in Muldrow v. St....more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Supreme Court Holds That Employees Need Not Show “Significant” Harm to Support a Title VII Discrimination Claim Based on a Job...

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

In a recent decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a lateral job transfer can – in certain circumstances – be an illegal adverse action and support a claim for a lawsuit for unlawful discrimination. This...more

Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP

Lateral Transfers and Reassignments Resulting in “Some Harm” May Now Give Rise To Actionable Discrimination Under Title VII

For decades, employers have depended on the rule that transferring or reassigning an employee would not give rise to an actionable discrimination claim, as long as such an action did not “significantly” change an employee’s...more

Ballard Spahr LLP

SCOTUS Lowered the Threshold of Harm Required for Title VII Discrimination Claims

Ballard Spahr LLP on

Last week, on April 17, 2024, the US Supreme Court unanimously held in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, et al., that an employee challenging a job transfer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII)...more

Saul Ewing LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Resolves Circuit Split Concerning Title VII Actions Related to Workplace Transfers

Saul Ewing LLP on

On April 17, 2024 the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a circuit split over the standard to apply to Title VII discrimination cases challenging job transfers, ruling that discriminatory workplace transfers are prohibited even if...more

Perkins Coie

Muldrow Sets a New Standard for Workplace Discrimination

Perkins Coie on

On April 17, 2024, in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, the Supreme Court of the United States held that an employer may violate Title VII’s anti-discrimination provisions when it transfers an employee even if the transfer did...more

Butler Snow LLP

Muldrow v. City of St. Louis: The Supreme Court Opens the Door for Discriminatory Job Transfer Claims

Butler Snow LLP on

On Wednesday, April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court provided an opening for workers to allege employment discrimination claims regarding job transfers based on sex, race, religion, or national origin. In Muldrow v....more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

SCOTUS Relaxes Standards for Title VII Plaintiffs in Workplace Discrimination Claims

In Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, No. 22-193, 2024 WL 1642826 (U.S. Apr. 17, 2024), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an employee alleging that an involuntary lateral job transfer constituted workplace discrimination in...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Supreme Court Clarifies When Job Transfers Can Serve as a Basis for Title VII Claims

Foley Hoag LLP on

On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Muldrow v. St. Louis that rejected a heightened injury standard for Title VII claims based on job transfers and held that employees alleging discrimination...more

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission...

Sprouts Farmers Market Resolves EEOC Discrimination Charge

Federal Investigation Determined Grocery Subjected Employees to Sexual Harassment and Retaliation - LOS ANGELES – Sprouts Farmers Market, a national grocery chain featuring natural foods, has settled a federal charge of...more

Proskauer - Law and the Workplace

Supreme Court Rules Discriminatory Job Transfers Need Not Produce “Significant” Harm to be Actionable Under Title VII

On April 17, 2024, the United States Supreme Court ruled on the standard under which a plaintiff can proceed with a claim for a discriminatory job transfer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”),...more

Perkins Coie

Courts Revisit the Boundaries of “Adverse Employment Actions” Under Title VII

Perkins Coie on

Courts continue to explore whether the threshold for actionable “adverse employment actions” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 has been construed too narrowly. Upending several decades of precedent, in 2023, the...more

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission...

Walgreens Pays $205,000 in EEOC Pregnancy and Disability Discrimination Lawsuit

Settles Federal Charges That Alexandria Pharmacy Refused to Allow Pregnant Worker Emergency Medical Leave, Forcing Her to Quit - NEW ORLEANS – Pharmacy and retailer Walgreens Co. has agreed to pay $205,000 and provide...more

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP

Retaliation. The second guy always gets caught.

Mike Daniels is a 300-pound mound of sound who played defensive tackle in the National Football League. After receiving more than a few personal foul penalties during his 10-year career, he explained that “the second guy...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Groff v. DeJoy and Its Impact on Religious Accommodation

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

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

DEI Under Scrutiny, Part I: Increased Challenges to DEI Programming Give Employers a Reason to Perform Risk Assessments

This article is the first part of Ogletree Deakins’ series, “DEI Under Scrutiny,” which examines the evolving employment law landscape for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in the United States....more

Marshall Dennehey

Third Circuit: Knowledge Requirement Not To Be Overlooked in Proving Retaliation

Marshall Dennehey on

Watkins v. Pennsylvania Dep't of Corr., No. 22-1426, 2023 WL 5925896 (3d Cir. Sept. 12, 2023) - A corrections officer sued his employer, the Department of Corrections (DOC), alleging a retaliatory hostile work environment in...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

The Fifth Circuit Has Broadened Its Definition of What Constitutes An “Adverse Employment Action” For Purposes of a Discrimination...

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: Confronted with pleadings that unequivocally showcases the Dallas County Sheriff’s Department’s discriminatory scheduling policies, the Fifth Circuit finds that the strict application of its precedent...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

OFCCP Announces Final PDN Rule

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

As previewed yesterday in OFCCP Interim Director Michelle Hodge’s keynote remarks during the opening day of the NILG 2023 National Conference, OFCCP has released the final rule on “procedures for identifying and remedying...more

DarrowEverett LLP

Q2 Employment Law Updates: Non-Competes, Religious Accommodation and More

DarrowEverett LLP on

So far, 2023 has been a wild ride for employers, a theme that looks to be continuing into the third quarter of the year. While certain predictions we made during Q1 came true in Q2 (we are looking at you, NLRB), others such...more

273 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 11

"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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide