In Groundhog Day, the problem isn’t that the day repeats. It’s that nothing changes. At one point, Phil Connors captures the frustration perfectly: “What if there is no tomorrow? There wasn’t one today.”
That same problem shows up when employers investigate complaints about a supervisor, conclude the conduct is not actionable, and then respond the same way each time the issue resurfaces. Continue reading
Hiring can feel like a checklist: background check, drug test, start date. But when an applicant raises a disability-related issue, those boxes stop being routine, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) starts asking questions. Continue reading
If retaliation claims could be proven just by pointing to an employer’s handbook, summary judgment would be extinct. This court made clear that policies don’t replace proof. Continue reading
Most employment cases fall apart because the evidence is thin or the comparators don’t line up.
This one fell apart because of what the employee herself admitted – under oath. Continue reading
The EEOC just pulled the plug on its most comprehensive harassment guidance. Some federal guardrails are gone, but the law is not – and neither are employers’ obligations. Continue reading
Deciding too early that accommodation is impossible can shape everything that follows. This case shows why courts often let juries sort it out.
In a recent ADA decision from the Northern District of Illinois, an employer decided an injured employee could not return as a bus operator under her medical restrictions. After that decision, the employer relied on its absence-without-leave policy to terminate her. The court refused to end the case at summary judgment. Continue reading
A single recruiting phone call. No application. No interview. And yet, enough evidence for a federal judge to let an ADA hiring case move forward. Continue reading
When an employee’s health takes a turn, the instinct is to be flexible. The legal risk is assuming flexibility means you cannot enforce expectations. Continue reading
Constructive discharge is one of the most misunderstood concepts in employment law. Employees often assume that feeling sidelined, embarrassed, or treated unfairly is enough to turn a resignation into a legal claim. Courts, however, continue to apply a far stricter standard – one that looks past discomfort and focuses on whether working conditions were truly intolerable.
A recent federal court decision out of Arkansas reinforces that point. Continue reading
HR professionals do not have a crystal ball. When an employee files an EEOC charge, no employer can predict how that dispute might later be reframed in a lawsuit or expanded with new legal theories.
A recent Fourth Circuit decision recognizes that reality, while still reinforcing something practical for employers and HR teams alike: the EEOC charge plays a meaningful role in defining the case that follows. Continue reading
The Employer Handbook Blog