Articles Posted in Discrimination and Unlawful Harassment

ChatGPT-Image-May-13-2025-07_36_49-PM-683x1024

Fired Over $15. Or Was It the HR Complaints?

A laundromat worker reimbursed herself $15 from the register for a taxi fare—something she claimed was standard practice with a receipt. Three days later, she was fired. But because she had just complained about racial harassment, disability discrimination, and unpaid wages, the timing raised red flags.

The Second Circuit said a jury should decide whether she was fired for taking the $15—or for speaking up. Continue reading

ChatGPT-Image-May-12-2025-10_23_20-PM-683x1024

You’d expect a company to listen when its Chief People Officer—especially one with nearly three decades of labor and employment law experience—raises concerns about compliance. Instead, this employer—a law firm—reassigned her shortly thereafter and fired her within the week of returning from bereavement leave. A jury just awarded her $3.27 million for retaliation.

Continue reading

ChatGPT-Image-May-11-2025-11_30_35-PM-1024x683

A recent Fifth Circuit decision offers a pointed reminder to employers, litigators, and trial courts alike: enforcement authority has limits—even after a verdict. At the center of the controversy? A court-ordered “religious liberty training” imposed on a corporate defendant’s attorneys by a judge dissatisfied with how the company communicated a jury’s verdict. Here’s how that unfolded—and why the appellate court stepped in.
Continue reading

ChatGPT-Image-May-1-2025-08_56_58-PM-683x1024

This week, lawmakers in both the House and Senate reintroduced the Equality Act, a bill that would explicitly prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity across numerous areas of federal law.

Although the bill has strong Democratic support, it lacks bipartisan backing—and given the political composition of Congress and the current administration’s stance, it is unlikely to become law during this session. Still, its reintroduction offers employers a timely opportunity to review existing policies and ensure compliance with current law. Continue reading

ChatGPT-Image-Apr-27-2025-10_27_48-PM-683x1024

When employees allege discrimination under the ADA, it’s their burden to prove bias — not the employer’s burden to defend every business decision. A recent Seventh Circuit case reinforces that when employers apply clear policies consistently, even imperfect decisions won’t amount to discrimination. Continue reading

“Doing What’s Right – Not Just What’s Legal”
Contact Information