Search
Articles Posted in Discrimination and Unlawful Harassment
I was right. This appellate court employment-law decision was one of the worst of 2014.
About a year ago, I blogged here about a dreadful Sixth Circuit opinion, in which the court concluded that the plaintiff may have a discrimination claim for receiving the specific transfer he requested (after having interviewed for the position).
Now, if you read the comments on my post, you’ll see that some of my readers took issue with my analysis of the case.
Well, I see your comments and raise you a scathing Justice Alito dissent from the United States Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari:
Saks claims transsexual discrimination is legal. And here’s why they’re probably right.
Over the weekend, I joined a Facebook thread discussing a recent federal court complaint filed in Texas by a former Saks employee, Leyth O. Jamal. Ms. Jamal claims that Saks violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by discriminating against her because she is transsexual.
Saks claims (here) that the complaint lacks merit because Title VII doesn’t prohibit discrimination against transgender employees.
Writing for Slate.com, Mark Joseph Stern calls out Saks’ “trans-bashing legal strategy” as “legally untenable.” Underscoring the Supreme Court’s decision in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, Mr. Stern notes that Title VII forbids sexual stereotyping. For example, in Price Waterhouse, the company allegedly treated Ms. Hopkins differently because she was “macho,” was “tough talking” and used “foul language.” That is, she didn’t conform to the company’s expectations of how a woman should act in the workplace.
It’s prolly not retaliation when you fire an employee who masturbates in your parking lot
Or, at least, when you honestly believe that one of your employees is masturbating in the parking lot.
(Unless, of course, you’re like by buddy Fred, who operates Parking Lot Self-Gratification, LLC).
Let’s just pretend that parenthetical remained in my head, ok?
After the jump, it’s a lesson on the law of retaliation involving the case of a school district employee who was fired for allegedly masturbating in a car…in the school parking lot…during school hours. And he claimed that his firing was retaliatory in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Allow that to sink in for a sec, then hit jump while I kiss the head of my golden blogging statuette and rub her belly…
* * *
“Your Asperger’s got in the way of your ability to interact with your boss, and we are tired of it.”
I tell you, folks.
When a school janitor, the plaintiff in this case, claimed that the school principal uttered the words in the lede above, I felt a stirring within.
Literally, the second those words (allegedly) formed on the principal’s lips, my Spidey Bloggy-senses told me that I’d be able to usher in the new year with a fine blog post.
Comin’ atcha after the jump…
* * *
Does the Americans with Disabilities Act require a transfer away from a jerk boss?
Whether you have a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act — so, like, all of us — or not, work can suck. Bosses can be jerks.
But, if an employee with a disability requests a transfer away from a jerk boss, must the company provide it?
Find out after the jump…
* * *
Company overcomes its “ham-handed” ADA accommodation response, wins lawsuit
So just how did the employer snatch victory from the jaws of defeat after botching a diabetic employee’s request to work a modified schedule?
Find out after jump…
* * *
The December 2014 edition of the Employment Law Blog Carnival #ELBC
The folks over at Blogging4Jobs.com have compiled a selection of the best blog posts on discrimination, contracts, & compliance for the December ’14 edition of the Employment Law Blog Carnival.
Be sure to check it out.
Ebola discrimination in your workplace, what the Department of Justice wants you to know.
If you entered a time machine a few months ago and came out today to read this post, you missed a lot.
The Kansas City Royals made the World Series. Grammy Award winning rapper Eve wed entrepreneur Maximillion Cooper at Cala Jondal Beach in Ibiza, Spain. And a big-time Ebola scare.
Yeah, that Ebola scare was really something. But, it kinda just came and went, didn’t it? We haven’t had a new Ebola case in the U.S. in months, which makes the timing of Monday’s release of “Public Guidance on Protecting Civil Rights While Responding to the Ebola Virus” from the U.S. Department of Justice a bit off.
Change a no-narcotics policy to accommodate an employee? No way!
Just seems like common sense to me, especially where the employee seeking the accommodation would have to operate a motor vehicle.
Wait a minute!
Did an employee with a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act really think it would be reasonable for his employer to allow him to take narcotic pain medication so that he could operate a company vehicle pain free?
More after the jump…
* * *
The Employer Handbook Blog


