Search
The Employer Handbook Blog
This term’s top 5 employment-law Supreme Court rulings…in haiku
Last month, the Supreme Court handed down – if not the most important – certainly, the highest-profile decision of this term with Wal-Mart v. Dukes. However, in addition to this headline-grabber, this term saw four other significant employment-law decisions from the High Court about which employers must take note.
After the jump, I revisit each case…in haiku.
* * *
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oa2JrO5_3k
Thompson v. North American Stainless, LP
Decided: January 24, 2011
Fiancée complains.
Thompson fired. Unlawful? Yes.
Zone of interest.
You can read more analysis of this opinion here.
Decided: January 24, 2011
Fiancée complains.
Thompson fired. Unlawful? Yes.
Zone of interest.
You can read more analysis of this opinion here.
***
Staub v. Proctor Hospital
Decided March 1, 2011
Manager biased.
Decision-maker is not.
Cat’s paw means Staub wins.
You can read more analysis of this opinion here.
Decided March 1, 2011
Manager biased.
Decision-maker is not.
Cat’s paw means Staub wins.
You can read more analysis of this opinion here.
***
Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp.
Decided March 22, 2011
“Filed any complaint”
It include oral complaints?
FLSA, yes.
You can read more analysis of this opinion here.
***
Fox v. Vice
Decided June 6, 2011
Defense fees paid for
frivolous claims, and not for
work on good faith claims
You can read more analysis of this opinion here.
***
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes
Decided June 20, 2011)
Female class too big.
Lacked a common injury.
Discrimination?
You can read more analysis of this opinion here.
Decided June 20, 2011)
Female class too big.
Lacked a common injury.
Discrimination?
You can read more analysis of this opinion here.