In a transgender-bias case with an employer-defendant concerned about having to violate its sincerely-held religious beliefs, the employee informed a federal appellate court last week that she is “reasonably concerned that the EEOC may no longer adequately represent her interests going forward.” Wow! Wow! WOW!!! “EEOC Sues Detroit Funeral Home Chain for…
Out of 276,376 page views in 2016 — thanks for reading and clicking refresh, dad — these five were straight fire!!! 5. The new DOL overtime rules are here. You’ve got HR questions? I have answers! 4. Foul! Nasty tweets to Steph Curry’s family cost a Cavs fan his job. 3. “A person…
I’ll go ahead and file this one under “Wa Wa Waaah!”
I’ll open this post with a haiku. Because, I feel like we could all use a haiku. President-Elect For HR, what will he do? Not a stinkin’ clue! …and any employment-law wonk who tells you otherwise, well, we saw how the pundits fared predicting the outcome of the presidential election.…
In 2001, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals decided Bibby v. Philadelphia Coca Cola Bottling Co. In Bibby, the Third Circuit could not have been clearer about whether federal anti-discrimination law made LGBT bias at work unlawful. “Title VII does not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. Congress has repeatedly…
Hold up. I need to catch my breath after last night’s episode of The Walking Dead. (Don’t worry. No spoilers ahead). Last week, I blogged here about the EEOC’s new Strategic Enforcement Plan. In that post, I singled out the EEOC’s pivot to “clarify[] the employment relationship and the application of…
As a corollary to yesterday’s post about David Lopez stepping down as EEOC General Counsel — *** Googles “corollary” — swish! *** — I bring you news of two recent court decisions advancing LGBT rights at work. 7th Cir. – Maybe Title VII protects workers from discrimination based on LGBT status after all. Earlier this…
I teased it in Friday’s post. Last week, a Michigan federal court held (here) that a workplace dress code that requires one gender to conform to a sex stereotype (e.g., men must wear suits, and women must wear dresses) is “direct evidence” of sex discrimination. But, the employer in the Michigan case refused…
Just for today, head on over to LinkedIn, and check out my post about how strict application of your dress code could result in a nasty sex discrimination claim. (And a little teaser for Monday — I’ll explain why the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision may trump Title VII and…
The lede comes directly from last Thursday’s much anticipated decision, in which the Seventh Circuit concluded in Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College (opinion here) that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the federal workplace anti-discrimination statute, does not protect workers from discrimination based on LGBT status. Title VII…