Discrimination against breastfeeding employee leads to jury verdict

by Rozlyn Fulgoni-Britton

With the passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), federal law required employers with more than 50 employees to provide breastfeeding employees a private location, other than a toilet stall, where they can express breastmilk in privacya. And, of course, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) has prohibited discrimination “on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions” since 1978. Despite those laws, court cases explaining employers’ duties to accommodate breastfeeding employees have been few and far between. In Hicks v. City of Tuscaloosa, Alabama, the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals provided guidance about employers’ responsibilities to breastfeeding employees.   ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Facts

read more…

What EEOC’s recent lawsuit over parental leave means for employers

by Jessica A.H. Howell

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is a federal agency that administers and enforces civil rights laws when individuals claim workplace discrimination. Recently, the EEOC filed suit against a cosmetics company for implementing and administering parental leave benefits in a discriminatory manner based on sex. The lawsuit is the first of its kind, but it likely won’t be the last. To ensure compliance with federal law and avoid legal challenges, review your parental leave policies and tread carefully when implementing new policies.  Parents want to spend time with baby

EEOC sues Estée Lauder

read more…

Oklahoma jury awards transgender worker $1.165 million in bias suit

by Charlie Plumb

The courts, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) hold differing views on whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or sexual identity. Nevertheless, on November 20, an Oklahoma City federal court jury awarded a transgender employee $1,165,000 on her discrimination and retaliation claims.    Vector modern transgender flag background

Professor Tudor’s claims

read more…

EEOC alleges medical exams and questionnaires violate ADA, GINA

by Courtney Bru

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) limits employers’ ability to make disability-related inquiries or subject employees to medical exams. You may not take those actions until after you’ve offered the applicant a job. Once a conditional offer of employment has been made, you may ask about medical conditions or require a medical exam, as long as you do it for all individuals in that job category. If the inquiries or exam screens someone out because of a disability, you must demonstrate that you rejected him for a reason that is “job-related and consistent with business necessity.” Generally, you must show you had a reasonable belief, based on objective evidence, that his ability to perform the essential job functions would be impaired by his medical condition.  Health history form

EEOC: Standards, inquiries used to discriminate

read more…

Employers, beware: Facility issues may result in violations of Title VII

by Jacob M. Monty

Many employers are aware of the serious problems that can arise if workers and supervisors engage in racially or sexually motivated taunts and speech. However, few employers realize that they may need to worry about the design and condition of their facilities. The facilities of a now-closed Sara Lee factory in Paris, Texas, reportedly cost the company $4 million in a settlement with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)Bathroom sign

Don’t do it like Sara Lee

read more…

When words used in a disciplinary report suggest implicit bias

by Barbara J. Koenig

Implicit bias is an unconscious preference for or an aversion to a person or a group of people. In other words, we may have an attitude toward others or stereotype them without conscious knowledge of what we’re doing. If we act in accordance with our implicit bias, we may be discriminating against a person or a group of people without even being aware of our bias. Two recent cases illustrate the fact that HR managers need to educate supervisors on implicit bias and how a seemingly straightforward description of an employee or a workplace incident can suggest racial animus and unconscious discrimination.  Bias

Seemingly innocent words suggest bias

read more…

Top 10 employer mistakes in accommodating disabled employees

by Matthew A. Goodin

Even experienced HR professionals have a difficult time with requests for reasonable accommodation from disabled employees. This process is even trickier if the employee needs a leave of absence as an accommodation because of the intersection of different laws that govern leaves of absence. Below are some of the most common mistakes employers make when accommodating employees with disabilities. Recognizing and avoiding these mistakes will go a long way toward preventing unwanted litigation.    TOP 10. Rainbow splash paint

1. Not having adequate job descriptions

read more…

Stage is set for SCOTUS to rule on Title VII and sexual orientation

September 17, 2017 - by: Utah Employment Law Letter 0 COMMENTS

by Ryan B. Frazier

Since the civil rights movement of the 1960s, state and federal laws have been enacted to prohibit employment discrimination against individuals on the basis of their race, ethnicity, age, disability, religion, and gender. Until recently, virtually none of those antidiscrimination laws covered employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Over the last decade, as issues related to sexual orientation and gender identity have moved to the forefront of social consciousness, several states and certain federal agencies, including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), have started to recognize and address employment discrimination in that context.  Supreme Court

Recognition of discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity has not been universal. Federal law is not resolved on the issue, and recent federal circuit court rulings have further complicated things. This article focuses on the recent appellate court rulings and how they are changing the employment discrimination landscape under federal law.

read more…

Diversity and inclusion director gets a little inclusion

by Michelle Lee Flores

The California Court of Appeal threw a solitary bone to Toyota’s director of diversity and inclusion when it reversed a trial court’s dismissal of his sexual orientation discrimination claim. The court of appeal held that the former employee had provided sufficient evidence that a senior manager’s perception that he was “too gay” was a substantial motivating factor for his termination. However, his evidence of sex or gender stereotyping didn’t support, and therefore didn’t save, his retaliation and wrongful discharge claims, both of which were dismissed by the trial court without going to the jury.  Justice is served

Diversity and inclusion director feels excluded

read more…

Be careful what you say: Employee’s name-calling lands him in hot water

by Franck G. Wobst

An Ohio Court of Appeals recently ruled that a city’s civil service commission acted within its rights when it suspended a city employee for 45 days for jokingly calling an African-American coworker “Black Buck” and “Big Black Buck.” Shhh!

Facts

read more…

 Page 1 of 13  1  2  3  4  5 » ...  Last »