Sixth Circuit Rules that Revised Arbitration Agreement did not Apply to Pending Class Action

A call center employee had signed a contract with the employer to arbitrate any employment disputes, but the arbitration contract only covered individual claims and not class actions. In January 2012, he filed a class action wage and hour complaint alleging that his employer failed to pay its employees for time spent logging in and out of their phone systems each work day.  More ›

EEOC Fails Again in its Effort to Bring a Disparate Impact Claim Based on Background Checks

The EEOC recently filed suit against an education corporation for discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 arguing that the employer's use of criminal and credit background checks for applicants had a disparate impact on racial minorities. More ›

Florida Supreme Court Holds that State law bars Pregnancy Discrimination

The front desk manager of a residential property became pregnant and, shortly thereafter, believed that her employer began discriminating against her on that basis. More ›

New San Francisco law Limits Employer Background Checks

Employers with locations in San Francisco should be aware of a new law enacted by the city that will limit the use of criminal background in vetting employees and applicants. The following will provide a brief summary of the new law and what employers must do to comply. More ›

NLRB Finds Policy Requiring Employees to Represent Employer in a “Positive and Professional” Manner is Unlawful

In a decision issued earlier this week, the National Labor Relations Board ruled that portions of an employer’s standards of conduct policy were unlawful because they could be reasonably construed to prohibit employees’ right to engage in protected activity under the National Labor Relations Act. The decision can only be described as the most recent in an increasingly long series of these cases, in which the Board has consistently found that language thought by an employer to be reasonable and appropriate actually violated the Act. More ›

Same Sex Harassment is Actionable, California Court of Appeal Affirms

In Lewis v. City of Benicia, the First Appellate District affirmed once again that in California, same-sex harassment is actionable.

Brian Lewis, a volunteer and later paid intern at the City of Benecia’s water treatment plan, claimed he was sexually harassed by two male supervisors (Hickman and Lantrip) in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), that he was subject to retaliation when he complained of the harassment, and that the City was liable for failing to prevent sexual harassment. More ›

Sixth Circuit: Retaliation Claim Fails if Decision-Maker is Unaware of Complaints

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has held that a terminated Hispanic employee working as the director of global finance for an auto parts company in Michigan could not sustain a retaliation claim because he was unable to show that the managers who fired him were aware of his complaints to HR about disparaging remarks.  More ›

Female African-American CEO who was Replaced by Female Hispanic has Race Discrimination Claim

A female African-American employee was employed as the Chief Executive Officer for a transit management company. Other executives of the company had issues with the CEO, and they exchanged disparaging e-mails referring to the CEO as a "prima donna" and "helluva b*tch." The CEO was eventually fired by a founder of the company and replaced by a Hispanic woman. More ›

White Waitress in her 50s who quit job Cannot Establish Race or Age Claims

A Caucasian restaurant waitress who was in her 50s was allegedly subjected to daily comments about her age by an African-American general manager (GM). She claimed that the GM called her name such as "old woman," "old lady," and "grandma."  More ›

Seventh Circuit: Employee Failed to Establish link Between Termination and Filing of Workers' Comp Claim

The employee, who worked as a passenger general trucker, was terminated after 22 years when he failed to submit to a mandatory drug test following a workplace accident. The employer maintained a mandatory written substance abuse policy that required drug testing in certain situations.  More ›