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
When an employee moonlights as a coworker’s unofficial lawyer – researching the law, contacting HR, and encouraging her to find a lawyer and pursue a charge with the EEOC – that role might be protected from retaliation. Overlook that and you could be handing them a legal claim. Continue reading
A software engineer said he was fired for blowing the whistle on a major cybersecurity flaw. But before his case ever reached trial, it fell apart. Deleted text messages, an incomplete phone data dump, and his lawyer’s discovery missteps ended it all. The court dismissed the case and ordered the employee and his attorney to pay more than $150,000 in sanctions. Continue reading
In most ADA cases, the question of whether an employee has a disability isn’t in serious dispute. Courts typically move quickly to focus on accommodations or workplace conduct. But in this case, the court stopped at step one, finding that the employee hadn’t shown he had a disability at all. Continue reading
A nurse claimed she was fired for her religious beliefs. The hospital said it fired her because of its religious beliefs.
So who gets Title VII’s protection? Continue reading
You think you’ve solved the problem. You separate the employee from the alleged harasser. You tell him not to contact her—ever. Years pass without incident. Then one day, the same two people cross paths again, and a decision that stops short of firing her, but directly threatens her pay and job security, is enough to keep a quid pro quo sexual harassment claim alive. Continue reading
If you keep one employee and lay off another, you need to be able to explain why. Courts don’t expect employees to be identical, but they will take a close look at whether your comparisons—and your process—hold up. Continue reading
The Department of Justice just offered more clarity on something most employers already know: you can’t treat people differently based on race or sex. But how does that principle apply to your DEI programs?
A new DOJ memo outlines where DEI initiatives might run afoul of federal law. It doesn’t change the rules—but it does spell out how some practices could create legal exposure. Continue reading
The Employer Handbook Blog