As the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s FY 2019 report reflects 21.4% of all employment charges handled in 2019 were for age discrimination; 41.4% of all charges allege retaliation. Recently, seven former directors of a grocery store chain filed suit alleging age discrimination and retaliation arising from alleged transfer to failing stores and denial of the … Continue Reading
Based on a set of somewhat unusual facts, a federal district court in Ohio ruled that an employer that refused to rehire a recently retired individual to his former position will need to argue at a jury trial that its decision was not based on age. In Rose v. City of Toledo, a 62-year-old employee … Continue Reading
Although the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) places arbitration agreements on the same footing as any other contract and generally precludes state laws banning mandatory arbitration, employers must ensure that their arbitration agreement are enforceable contracts – an issue governed by state law. In Taylor v. Dolgencorp, LLC, an employer sought to compel arbitration of claims … Continue Reading
Workplace law changes constantly. Employers and EPL carriers need to keep up with expanding risks, changing legal obligations, reason-defying jury verdicts, the #MeToo movement, and a record number of threatened and asserted claims associated with these changes. Our 2019 EPLI Trends Report gives an overview of the related risks and exposures employers and, by extension, … Continue Reading
An employer’s retention of a younger, less-qualified employee instead of the older, more experienced employee, who was terminated during the Company’s reduction in force, can give rise to liability under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), according to a recent decision by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. Harrison … Continue Reading
The New York City Commission on Human Rights has released Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) as guidance on the “Stop Sexual Harassment in NYC Act.” New York City employers with at least 15 employees are required to conduct annual anti-sexual harassment training for all employees starting April 1, 2019. For complete details click here.… Continue Reading
Many times, timing is everything (or nearly so). For example, in Dighello v. Thurston Foods, Inc. (and unlike the Eleventh Circuit’s ruling in Bailey v. Oakwood Healthcare, Inc., about which we recently wrote), the trial court held that a plaintiff who was discharged shortly after suffering an asthma attack at work plausibly alleged an FMLA retaliation … Continue Reading
In Bailey v. Oakwood Healthcare, Inc., No. 17-2158 (April 23, 2018), the 11th Circuit found that an employer’s decision to terminate an employee on the day she returned from maternity leave was not discriminatory because during her leave, the employer discovered deficiencies in performance and falsifications in her employment application. The decision in Bailey reinforces … Continue Reading
In Lassiter v. Hidalgo Medical Services, No. 17-00850 (D. N.M. Apr. 18, 2018), a former employee sought to compel production of outside counsel’s reports and findings of an internal investigation into harassment claims. The discovery demand was denied, in this instance, because the Court found that the documents, which contained “factual summaries of the information … Continue Reading
For employers defending discrimination claims in which the plaintiff claims emotional distress, social media accounts are potential treasure troves of evidence of claimant’s feelings, thoughts, and mental impressions. In Forman v. Henkin, New York State’s highest court held that the “threshold inquiry” for social media disclosure is whether the materials sought are “reasonably calculated to … Continue Reading
Pregnancy discrimination can arise from an employer’s effort to “protect” a pregnant worker from harm, just as it can from other adverse actions. In Cameron v. NYC Dept. of Educ., 15-cv-9900 (S.D.N.Y), it was alleged that plaintiff no longer received teaching assignments after her pregnancy became visible and known. According to plaintiff, the principal told … Continue Reading
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama in McClain v. Tenax Corp. recently denied in part an employer’s motion for summary judgment on a disabled employee’s failure to accommodate claim under the ADA. The Court held the ADA-required interactive process never took place where the employer’s issued an ultimatum to the … Continue Reading
In Rodrigo v. Carle Foundation Hospital, No.16-1403 (7th Cir.), plaintiff was a medical resident in a three-year residency program (the “Program”). In addition to completing certain rotations and passing parts one and two of the United States Medical Licensing Examination (“USMLE”) or (“Step 1” and “Step 2,” respectively), residents were required to pass Step 3 … Continue Reading
To enable employees to deal with natural disasters and severe local weather, employers should prepare to address issues arising from employees’ inability to get to work. By itself, being stuck at home because of a blizzard is not a protected activity. This constitutes a personal absence warranting no protection under the law. However, if the … Continue Reading
The United States District Court for the District of Columbia recently permitted a Title VII retaliation claim to proceed to trial based on allegations of retaliatory relocation of a worker’s workstation. In Massaquoi v. District of Columbia, the plaintiff was relocated to a new workstation one month after he complained to his supervisor about disparate … Continue Reading
In light of the many high-profile news stories involving sexual harassment, employers are cognizant of the need to update policies, improve investigation procedures, and conduct training. However, there is more going on than meets the eye. Several states have proposed legislation that creates a path for victims to come forward. In addition, the new federal … Continue Reading
Though still a year away, employee health plans are in for significant change beginning January 1, 2019. This modification is the result of a longstanding argument about plan administration. In October 2016, the AARP sued the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), arguing that the regulations interpreting the Americans With Disabilities Act and Genetic Information Nondiscrimination … Continue Reading
Some times, small steps can have a big impact in defending employment-related litigation. For a few tips to start the new year click here… Continue Reading
In a recently filed lawsuit, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission contends that Consolidated Edison Co. (“Con Ed”) violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act of 2008 (“GINA”) by its use of pre-employment medical examinations. According to the Complaint, Con Ed required applicants to submit to pre-employment medical examinations … Continue Reading
In a decision of apparent first impression in New York, an appellate court has ruled that the sexual jealousy of an employer’s spouse may be considered gender discrimination under New York State and New York City law (Edwards v. Nicolai). In this case, the husband and wife were co-owners of a chiropractic office. The practice … Continue Reading
In our e-commerce age, lawsuits complaining that business websites are not accessible to vision-impaired users in violation of Title III of the Americans With Disabilities are on the rise. For a complete discussion and important takeaways, click here.… Continue Reading
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently rejected a claim that applicants can sue for disparate impact under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). Villarreal v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, et al., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18074 (Oct. 5, 2016). The plaintiff alleged that R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company’s recruiting practices … Continue Reading
In Beaton v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority New York City Transit, Docket No. 15 CV 08056 (S.D.N.Y. June 15, 2016), the Court denied Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s disability discrimination claims under the ADA and local laws. The case is significant because it addressed an alleged mental disability. By way of background, Plaintiff was employed by … Continue Reading
In Jones v. Pate Rehab. Endeavors, Inc., Docket No. 14-CV-2218 (N.D. Tx. June 17, 2016), the Court denied Defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing Plaintiff’s age discrimination claim under the ADEA. By way of background, Defendant employed Plaintiff as a Patient Transporter, which required him to transport patients in a motor vehicle. During his employment, … Continue Reading
