Several years ago, I attended a continuing legal education event at which a panel of attorneys discussed accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act. I remember the law-firm attorneys talking about how the ADA only requires that an employer provide a reasonable accommodation — not necessarily the employee’s first choice of reasonable accommodations.
Last week, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals
daintily dabbed the Cheez Whiz from their cheeseteak holes and voted provolone out of Philadelphia took up the issue of whether a company with which a staffing company places temporary workers can be sued for discrimination.
In Pennsylvania, the Rules of Professional Conduct require that an attorney must stay abreast of changes in changes in the law, including the benefits of advances in technology.
I mean, geez. For a litigator, it’s absolutely essential. And I’m not even talking about having a LinkedIn profile.
Who would have guessed that, in a state without a state administrative agency to accept discrimination charges, where only age discrimination is against state law, a federal judge would rule that sexual orientation is considered sex discrimination and, therefore, a violation of Title VII.