A former EEOC employee says the agency’s LGBTQ+ rollbacks made his job intolerable, including changes he was required to help implement. A federal court has allowed his harassment, discrimination, and retaliation claims to proceed. Continue reading
If a manager has to explain why telling an employee to stop going to HR was legally defensible, the conversation has already gone poorly.
A boss wanted to discuss settling an employee’s harassment claims without lawyers present. That invitation came with more baggage than the calendar entry suggested. Continue reading
A Mexico vacation while on sick leave is an easy headline. The employer’s defense required a closer look at two separate decisions.
The employer hired an outside investigator to examine workplace concerns. A former HR employee later relied on what the investigator allegedly documented to support her own bias claims.
Management enforced its drug-testing rule. The exceptions it made afterward created the bigger problem.
A 25-minute meeting in Spanish allegedly became a two-sentence summary in English. That may be a workplace communication problem, but this court did not see race or national-origin discrimination.
The employer approved light duty. Seventeen days later, it fired the pregnant employee over an alleged policy violation from two months earlier.
The employer thought it had caught an employee lying in an EEOC charge. Then it put that conclusion in the termination notice.
That second decision cost considerably more than the first. Continue reading
Her job was tracking employee attendance. Unfortunately, someone was tracking hers, too.
The Employer Handbook Blog