ChatGPT-Image-Oct-28-2025-10_59_29-PM-1024x683

The Supreme Court recently made it easier for employees to prove discrimination, lowering the bar from “serious harm” to “some harm.” That change came from a 2024 sex discrimination case, but its reasoning can influence other Title VII claims too. A new decision from the federal court in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania shows that even when courts apply that softer standard to quid pro quo harassment claims, retaliation still requires a higher level of proof, and neither test was met here. Continue reading

 

PF-Immigration-Forum-Invitation-1024x580

Recent federal actions targeting the H-1B visa program have raised new questions for employers. To help make sense of these developments, the Pierson Ferdinand immigration team — including the author of the firm’s latest client alert — will host a virtual forum on what employers should expect and how to prepare. Continue reading

ChatGPT-Image-Oct-21-2025-06_51_05-PM

What if a Black employee uses the N-word in the workplace, directed at no one in particular, and gets fired? Can that employee claim race discrimination under Title VII? A federal judge in Pennsylvania just called that argument “an absurdity.” Continue reading

ChatGPT-Image-Oct-19-2025-06_38_25-PM

Employers often worry that if they don’t run a picture-perfect investigation, a court will second-guess their decision. The Sixth Circuit just reminded everyone that the law doesn’t demand perfection; it demands reasonableness. And one employer’s measured, fact-based approach was enough to win. Continue reading

ChatGPT-Image-Oct-12-2025-02_45_51-PM

When the agency that enforces the nation’s anti-discrimination laws ends up defending one of its own under Title VII, that is not just newsworthy. It is a lesson for every employer about how bias, inconsistency, and poor process can sneak into even the most compliance-minded workplaces. Continue reading

“Doing What’s Right – Not Just What’s Legal”
Contact Information