The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission doesn’t think so. It’s suing a residential home service and repair company for violating federal law when it allegedly required employees to participate in religious prayer sessions as a condition of employment and retaliated against employees who opposed the unlawful practice. Continue reading
Yesterday, we covered whether the Family and Medical Leave Act allows women who have an abortion to obtain leave for a serious health condition.
Today, we’ll talk about the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA), which amended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prohibit employers from taking adverse employment actions “because of or on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.” Continue reading
Some of you are clutching your pearls and mouthing, “God, I hope so.” Continue reading
Does the spike in remote work arrangements over the past few years mean the end of wacky sexual harassment cases?
Yeah, right!
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission caught a whiff, sued the employer in December, and just announced a $361,000 settlement for seven current and former female employees. Continue reading
Over the weekend, I caught up on a few older cases I had intended to blog about earlier. The one today on which I’ll focus has some “disturbing facts.”
At least that’s how one of the Fifth Circuit judges deciding the case viewed them: Continue reading
That’s effectively the argument the plaintiff, an openly gay man, made in this case.
What I’ve got for you today is another hostile work environment decision. But, unlike yesterday’s general civility code violation, well short of the pervasive or severe behavior that could interfere with an employee’s working conditions, today’s is a doozy. We’re talking about four instances of racial harassment: an offensive note, a noose, a written threat in the plaintiff’s locker, and then another noose.
And, yet, the plaintiff lost this case too. Continue reading
This case involves a plaintiff who worked as a part-time bartender who worked for a bar in New Jersey. She claimed that her supervisor created a hostile work environment by calling the plaintiff names “used to describe a person with an oversized posterior.” (The court deemed it unnecessary to identify the supervisor’s “alternate names” for the plaintiff.) Continue reading
A few weeks ago, I blogged about a situation involving an employee who used CBD products and tested positive for marijuana at work. She claimed that the employer took into account her underlying disability when it terminated her employment and violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. The employer countered that it did know she was disabled. So, the employer won.
But, now, let’s change the facts. Continue reading
The Employer Handbook Blog