Articles Posted in Disparate Impact / Disparate Treatment

| by

ChatGPT-Image-Dec-13-2025-10_01_10-AM-1024x683

The EEOC’s decision to pull back from investigating disparate impact claims has been loud, controversial, and headline-worthy. And for employees watching their charges get administratively closed in real time, it can feel like the agency has simply walked away. But federal courts are not there to referee agency priorities or second-guess investigations.

TL;DR: A federal court dismissed an employee’s lawsuit against the EEOC after the agency administratively closed her disparate-impact charge following a shift in enforcement priorities. The court held that charging parties have no judicially cognizable right to a particular EEOC investigation, and no standing to force the agency to reopen one. Whatever the EEOC does or does not do, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 claims are litigated de novo against the employer – not the agency.

📄Read the decision

Continue reading

| by

ChatGPT-Image-Apr-23-2025-07_47_27-PM

President Trump’s latest executive order could change how the federal government handles workplace discrimination — but not in the way you might think.

Before you assume that disparate impact claims are gone for good, let’s unpack what the order does (and doesn’t) do. Continue reading

| by

noun-wearable-7080645-1024x1024

Yesterday, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced the release of a new fact sheet titled “Wearables in the Workplace: The Use of Wearables and Other Monitoring Technology Under Federal Employment Discrimination Laws.” This document is crucial for human resources professionals as it provides guidance on using wearable technologies in compliance with federal employment discrimination laws. Here, I’ll summarize the key points of the fact sheet and offer some essential takeaways for HR professionals.

Continue reading

| by

noun-robots-2010250-1024x1024

We began July with New York City starting to enforce its law that requires companies hiring with artificial intelligence to notify candidates, provide candidates with particular information about data collected and analyzed, and independently audit the technology. It’s all in the name of removing bias from the hiring process, which the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has warned employers about, too.

Now, two Senators are co-sponsoring legislation they claim will “protect and empower workers by preventing employers from relying exclusively on artificial intelligence or bots to make employment decisions.” Continue reading

| by

Shake shack cheese fries.jpg
You’ll have to pardon the headline.

I’m not nearly as articulate as the Third Circuit was in yesterday’s opinion in Karlo v. Pittsburgh Glass Works, LLC, using words like “cognizable” and “disproportionate adverse impact.” And, even though the Third Circuit sits in Philadelphia, you won’t find local lingo like “old head” or “jawn” anywhere in the opinion.

Although, I’m pretty sure page 6 has a cheez whiz stain on it.

Continue reading

| by

1963 Rambler Ambassador 880 sedan gold-white K-j.jpgWell, I suppose you can claim just about anything.

For example ***takes big dose of medication*** I claim god status on the third sun for Rondor. My fourth place finish on the unaired celebrity-blogger episode of Chopped really raised by Rondor grass cred. (No streets on Rondor; only luscious purple grass).

But, when you’re a married school superintendent. And you sneak off during school hours. And you’re sneaking with a female para-educator. Well, sneaking and having sex with the female para-educator in her parked car. You can imagine how this ended.

Well, the former school superintendent — see what I did there? — claimed that his marital status (as opposed to his sexual relationship with a female co-worker who was not his wife) was the reason for his termination.

Thoughts…

Continue reading

| by

 

Maybe it’s the luck of the draw, but most of the discrimination cases I defend are hostile work environment cases, where an alleged harasser supposedly has made an employee-victim’s life miserable with certain comments, jokes, gestures, touchings, you name it.

Far less often do I encounter disparate-treatment claims. A disparate-treatment claim is one where an employee claims that another similarly-situated employee in another class was treated more favorably because of his/her protected class. For example, a female employee claims that similarly-situated male employees are paid more because they are men.

Sounds like the facts of a recent case decided right in my backyard in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. This case provides a great opportunity to go back to school on what it means to be similarly-situated…after the jump…

* * *

Continue reading

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

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2025, Eric B. Meyer
| All Rights Reserved Worldwide.
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design