Some accommodation requests are straightforward. Others arrive wrapped in spiritual language but turn out to be personal views, broad objections, or political frustrations. A recent federal decision breaks down the elements courts look for in separating religious beliefs from non-religious objections. Continue reading
Supervisors sometimes say things they should never say. When that happens, employers usually brace for impact. But this case shows how strong documentation and independent decision-making can prevent one person’s bad behavior from controlling the outcome. Continue reading
Several readers of this blog have floated the idea that Muldrow v. City of St. Louis — the Supreme Court’s recalibration of what counts as actionable harm in discrimination cases — might ripple into harassment standards. One federal appellate court recently explained why it doesn’t. Continue reading
Most employers are not trying to police anyone’s hairstyle, but vague grooming or “professional appearance” rules can sometimes cause problems. Pennsylvania’s upcoming CROWN Act aims to prevent that by making it clear that hair texture and protective styles are protected traits under the PHRA. That means it is a good time for employers to review their policies and make sure they line up with the new standards. Continue reading
The EEOC just refreshed its national origin educational materials. They focus on anti-American discrimination. But turn the examples around and you see an equally important point: pro-American favoritism can violate Title VII too. Continue reading
Some lawsuits keep you guessing. This one did not. When a court reviews missed deadlines, clear directives, and an internal investigation confirming the same issues, the outcome writes itself.
And as the Fourth Circuit reminded everyone, reporting discrimination does not make documented performance problems disappear. Continue reading
Led Zeppelin was decades ahead of the ADA, but “good times, bad times” captures exactly how episodic disabilities can look in the workplace. Some employees have great days. Others have rough days. Most have both. And under the ADA, those fluctuating limitations still count. A recent Sixth Circuit decision shows why employers cannot ignore an employee’s bad days just because the good ones look fine. Continue reading
Employees and supervisors often assume that any inappropriate physical contact is automatically a hostile work environment. But the Eleventh Circuit continues to apply one of the strictest “severe or pervasive” standards in the country. This case shows just how high that bar is.
This is part two of the series. Yesterday’s post covered why a criminal subpoena did not count as Title VII “participation.” Today, we look at the employee’s hostile work environment claim. Continue reading
Some workplace retaliation theories sound plausible at first glance. But Title VII’s protections are far narrower than many employees assume. A recent Eleventh Circuit decision digs into a niche but important point: whether a criminal subpoena can qualify as Title VII “participation.”
This is part one of two. Tomorrow, we look at the court’s take on whether two unwanted physical encounters created a hostile work environment. Continue reading
A discrimination complaint can be genuine without being legally protected.
An employee learned that the hard way when her retaliation claim flatlined before it even got to trial.
A magistrate judge in a federal court recently reminded employers that even a sincere complaint has to be objectively reasonable before it triggers retaliation protection under Title VII. Continue reading
The Employer Handbook Blog