Earlier this year, Philadelphia passed a law banning employers from asking about a job applicant’s salary history. In that blog post, I foreshadowed a possible lawsuit from business groups to block the law, which would otherwise take effect on May 23.
So, glad you asked.
In a nutshell, the consensus was that training, vocational and apprenticeship programs are essential to creating more employment opportunities for workers. While technology and removing barriers for folks with disabilities could create more opportunities for more educated workers; one panelist cited President Trump’s push for infrastructure investment as a way to create jobs for blue collar workers.
For more on yesterday’s meeting at the EEOC, here is the EEOC press release. I took the liberty of curating the live tweet stream here. And, you can find bios and written testimony from the panelists here.
The trailblazing Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals achieved a monumental result. And it only took 53 years after the enactment of Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964.
Below, I have a breakdown of yesterday’s historic decision in Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College.
The biggest impact on employers, when the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act took effect on January 1, 2009, was to downplay whether an employee actually had a disability, and get businesses focusing more on whether there existing a reasonable accommodation that would permit an employee to perform the essential functions of the job.
Many management-side employment lawyers joked that, under the ADAAA, everyone had a disability. That’s how easy it was to establish.
Well, except maybe a cleft palate.
In case you haven’t heard, Cracker Barrel fired Brad’s wife — or so we’re told. And, the internet is losing it’s you-know-what.
If you’re late to the party, and don’t have a clue what I’m talking about, read these posts:
A few months ago, I was waxing poetic about plutonium, how to establish essential job functions, and quality-testing diet scrapple. What got into me?
Now, I’ve got a cautionary tale, in the form of a recent federal court opinion, to help you good folks navigate away from some of the Americans with Disabilities Act traps. Lest you like litigation and lawyer bills.
//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js
I’ll be back tomorrow.
It was déjà vu all over again yesterday.
In its much anticipated decision in Christiansen v. Omnicom Group, Inc. (opinion here), the Second Circuit concluded that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act does not cover discrimination based on sexual orientation.
You wouldn’t fire someone because they complained to you about sexual harassment at work. For starters, that would violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
But, Title VII’s anti-retaliation provisions are much broader than that.
The Employer Handbook Blog