In recent years, employer efforts in Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (“DEI”) have come under fire in both the political and legal landscapes. In Young v. Colorado Dept. of Corrections et al., No. 23-1063 (10th Cir. Mar. 11, 2024), the Tenth …
In Gavin v. Roxbury Community College, the Plaintiff, Thomas Gavin (Plaintiff), the Director of Facilities and Public Safety at Roxbury Community College (College), a public college in Massachusetts, served as the College’s primary security authority and compliance officer for the …
As we’ve been looking at the benefits and potential risks associated with AI, it seemed apt to discuss a novel case recently filed in the federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois. In Nippon Life Insurance Company of …
Employers are not only responsible for the conduct of their employees in the workplace; there also exists an obligation to protect employees from the conduct of third parties with whom an employer chooses to work. A circuit split has developed …
As we previously discussed with respect to the rollback of the EEOC Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace (“2024 Memo”), recission of guidance does not change employer compliance obligations under the law. In 2021, the EEOC launched its initiative …
If you don’t recall the pivotal decision of the United States Supreme Court in Bostock v. Clayton County, here is a refresher. The case represented a historic civil rights ruling in which the Court found prohibitions against discrimination based on …
What must an employee show to establish they have been subject to adverse action by their employer? In Muldrow v. City of St Louis, the Supreme Court of the United States considered this question. Sergeant Jatonya Clayborn Muldrow (Plaintiff), a …
In EEOC v. Drivers Management LLC and Werner Enterprises, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals considered whether Werner Enterprises (“Werner”) had proven affirmative defenses of undue hardship and direct threat for failure to hire and accommodate CDL holder, Victor Robinson …
In Kuklenski v. Medtronic USA, Inc., the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals considered whether an employee working remotely at a Minnesota-based company was an employee as defined and contemplated under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (“MHRA”). The MHRA describes an …
We are grateful for your trust and partnership this year. Hope your holidays are filled with peace, cheer and a sprinkle of rest.
