An excellent teacher with a progressive disability wanted paid leave to get a guide dog. Her employer offered unpaid leave instead. A federal appeals court just said that was enough.
A cocktail server with a foot disability wore Skechers sneakers for two years under an accommodation her employer granted. When new management decided sneakers didn’t meet appearance standards, the employer narrowed the accommodation and eventually terminated her for refusing to comply. Most of the lawsuit went with her.
A racial slur used in 2007 was still admissible evidence at a 2024 trial. The employer’s failure to address it helped produce a $21 million verdict.
Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Justice told the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that it has been applying its disparate-impact guidelines unconstitutionally.
That’s awkward, right?
Well, perhaps not. For most employers, it may be even less than that.
The EEOC approved a new National Enforcement Plan last week, and for the first time in recent memory ever, the agency has put DEI programs, religious accommodations, and national origin bias against American workers on the same priority list.
The city’s civil-service commission told it to follow its own hiring policies. It didn’t. It still won.
A teacher gets twice the students, a warning for observing a religious holiday, and a misconduct investigation after venting on a union Facebook page. She loses every claim.
COVID-era telework was an emergency exception. Courts aren’t treating it as a permanent rewrite of job requirements.
Sometimes the facts supporting a religious accommodation denial are so strong that skipping the accommodation process doesn’t sink you. This healthcare employer found that out — and the 9th Circuit’s reasoning tells you exactly why.
The Employer Handbook Blog