Sometimes it is not the big-ticket accommodations that land an employer in court. It is the small ones, like a few stretch breaks, that can become costly mistakes. Continue reading
An employee asked for a religious exemption, was denied, suspended, and then reinstated once litigation began. The Fifth Circuit’s majority brushed the case aside on a technicality. But a dissenting judge warned that when it comes to religious accommodations, delay can itself be discrimination. Continue reading
Religious-accommodation requests are getting harder for employers to navigate, especially when they collide with policies meant to support transgender employees. The Seventh Circuit just reminded us that employers cannot lean on complaints or speculation alone. A jury will decide whether denying an accommodation is justified by a true “undue hardship.” Continue reading
Think you can brush off a job candidate the moment they mention a religious accommodation? The EEOC just reminded employers again that this is a fast track to litigation, a costly payout, and years of government oversight. And this case is part of a much bigger story: the agency’s current enforcement push on religious liberty. Continue reading
A jail administrator posted apocalyptic religious commentary online. A reporter found it, published a story, and suddenly the county faced community outrage and questions from federal officials about whether they would continue housing inmates at the jail. The county fired the administrator. The employee sued under Title VII.
The Eighth Circuit just said: not so fast. Continue reading
When employees rack up overtime without approval, it doesn’t make them look dedicated – it makes them insubordinate. And as one nurse at a VA hospital just learned, that can sink an age discrimination claim.
A performance review ended with a professor out of a job, and the employer defending itself in court. The problem? Remarks about maternity leave, inconsistent flexibility, and suspicious timing after a discrimination complaint. The appellate court said a jury should hear the case. Continue reading
When a customer harasses an employee, the EEOC says employers are liable if they knew or should have known and didn’t act. The Sixth Circuit says: not unless you intended it to happen. Continue reading
When an employer believes an employee may have mental health concerns, requiring counseling as a condition of continued employment can create serious legal risk. And after a 2024 Supreme Court decision lowered the legal bar for what counts as an “adverse action,” that choice could be a fast track to the courtroom. Continue reading
When it comes to workplace retaliation, the difference between winning and losing can hinge on whether you are in state court or federal court. A recent New Jersey appellate decision reinforces that state anti-discrimination laws may not just mirror federal law – in some ways, they can give employees broader protection. Continue reading
The Employer Handbook Blog