I have no idea. I was hoping that one of you could help me out.
Oh, wait, I’m supposed to be the expert here. Ok. Fine. I’ll play some music and dish the deets — hint, it has something to do with the picture — after the jump…
Back in June, the United States Supreme Court ruled here that a class of 1.5 million women could not pursue gender discrimination claims together against Wal-Mart because they lacked a common injury.
If, at first, you don’t succeed, file this Complaint in California on behalf of a class of only 90,000 plaintiffs. Will this small smaller lawsuit hold up? Find out after the jump…
At least that’s what a federal court in Utah opined.
I promise that this is not a prurient post gratuitously conceived to drive internet traffic to The Employer Handbook.
And this case has nothing directly to do with Pennsylvania, New Jersey or Delaware employers
(Ok, that last line was shameless. Google, please do not index this post).
Oh, what the heck, index away. After the jump, I’ll even throw in some good employer takeaways for all employers, including those in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware.
Darn it. I did it again…
A federal court has bounced a woman’s sexual harassment claims against her former employer because the court believed that the woman was not offended by the conduct about which she complained.
Some analysis and employer lessons after the jump…
Last month, the Supreme Court handed down – if not the most important – certainly, the highest-profile decision of this term with Wal-Mart v. Dukes. However, in addition to this headline-grabber, this term saw four other significant employment-law decisions from the High Court about which employers must take note.
After the jump, I revisit each case…in haiku.
* * *
As reported on this blog yesterday, as well as in a gazillion other news outlets — but probably here first firstish — the U.S. Supreme Court has overturned certification of a potential class of 1.5 million current and former female employees seeking relief against Wal-Mart for alleged gender discrimination.
After the jump, a break down of the Opinion and what it means for employers, big and small.
The United States Supreme Court has just overturned a Ninth Circuit decision that would have allowed 1.5 million female employees to pursue a class-action gender discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. You can read a copy of the Supreme Court’s opinion here.
I’ll have more on this decision tomorrow at The Employer Handbook.
I had trouble sleeping last night.
If you read yesterday’s post, you know that when deciding between a post about an NFL cheerleader who was fired for risque pictures mailed to the Indianapolis Colts versus labor law and Twitter, I chose labor law and Twitter.
***stupid Twitter!***
I won’t make the same mistake twice. So, without further ado, I have the pictures federal-court complaint of the fired cheerleader and a brief rundown of her chances of success.
***Oh, Twitter. I can’t stay mad at you. I’ll give you a foot rub — right after I finish this can of Four Loko.***
Don’t judge me. Just skip past the jump. TGIF, yo.
The Employer Handbook Blog